"Digital access is not a privilege—it is a right," declared the Supreme Court of India on April 30, 2025, in a historic judgment that stated inclusive and meaningful access to digital services is integral to the fundamental right to life and liberty enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The ruling, given by Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, could not have been more timely. India increasingly relies on digital platforms to provide welfare services, banking, and governance. Yet, many citizens, particularly the disabled, are excluded from digital systems based on biometric authentication (e.g., fingerprints, facial recognition, etc.).

The verdict means that "digital access" is feasible and must be inclusive. Services are becoming increasingly dependent on digital identity, so there is not just an optional "right to digital access" but a necessary one.

Digital Exclusion is Rights Denial

The case started with Amar Jain, a visually impaired lawyer, and others who were unable to access essential services due to their disabilities. As India digitised services, specific services began to require e-KYC for banking, welfare, and telecommunications. These services relied on biometric data—fingerprints, facial scans, and iris scans—and provided barriers to persons with disabilities who couldn't give the required data.

To the persons with disabilities, this created a barrier to accessing the services they held a legal right to access.

The Supreme Court did not see this as a technical consideration, but rather a violation of the right to dignity and equality. The justices decided that if public services are digital, they must be inclusive. A digital exclusion equates to a denial of dignity and equality.

KYC Guidelines and the Barrier They Created

In recent years, the Indian government and private services have made e-KYC compulsory for virtually everything, from opening a bank account to getting a SIM card to receiving welfare benefits.

E-KYC is designed to make things easier. However, it relies heavily on biometric data, which not everyone can access.

The judgment now requires actors such as the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), banks, and telecom companies to provide alternatives to e-KYC. The alternatives could include:

• OTP/one-time verification
• Manual verification
• Video-based-KYC
• Service-based assistance at customer service centres

This is not just a matter of convenience. It's about making sure that people's dignity and rights are restored for those are were previously left out.

Connecting Digital Access to Substantive Equality

So, how does this decision relate to substantive equality?

Substantive equality is more than simply treating everyone the same. It acknowledges that different people have different needs, and those needs must be accommodated in systems.

While the Court said that formal equality (treating people equally) is essential, it cannot be the only consideration. True equality, which achieves justice, happens when systems are inclusive of all people, especially the marginalised.

In this circumstance, the case demonstrated that insisting on universal accessibility to digital systems was adversely impacting people with disabilities. That is not equality. That’s exclusion.

The message from the Court was clear: adopt systems that work for everyone, not just the majority.

How does Equality evolve in Society?

This ruling acts as a reminder that equality is not stagnant either.

Equality in the past meant equal access to schools, workplaces, and voting booths. Today, equality means equal access to online resources. As things move online, not being in the digital space is impactful as being excluded from society.

This evolution of equality is also an indicator of how societies evolve. As a country becomes more technologically advanced, it is expected that the same society will become more aware and inclusive. Equality should go hand in hand with technological advancement.

Digital Access Is Creating a New Rift in Society

India's digital progress has been celebrated around the world. UPI payments, Aadhaar-registered services, repositories of online portals for tax to ration cards - India has done a lot.

However, digital progress has created a new kind of divide: the digital divide.

• Urban vs rural
• Tech-literate vs tech-illiterate
• Able vs disabled
• Educated vs underpriveleged

This divide is dangerous. When essential services move public services online and don’t have an accessible doorway, the first people left behind are the poor, elderly, and disabled. And once you are left out of a digital system, you are left out of society.

This is why the Supreme Court ruling is so decisive. It states, "We cannot move forward as a digital nation if we are leaving people behind."

Implications for Policy and Governance

The ruling is more than merely symbolic. It carries some strong directives:

• All government websites must comply with web accessibility standards in the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act.

• Banks and telecommunication service providers must revise their policies and practices. Simplified KYC processes must consider access for all.

• Regulators: UIDAI, RBI and TRAI -- must also establish and promote inclusive practices.

This also has implications for future digital laws and policies—all laws and policies will need to pass the disability and inclusion check before being rolled out.

This challenges policymakers: access must be a design principle, not an afterthought.

Conclusion: A Judgment for the Digital Future

This landmark decision by the Supreme Court is a positive stride toward a more inclusive digital India.

It acknowledges that in today's world, access to digital services is as essential as access to food, education, or health care. Access to digital services is not just about apps and websites but about dignity, participation, and freedom.

As India digitises, this decision ensures no one will be left behind. It reminds us that progress means not just faster but fairer.

Because genuine development happens not when the privileged move forward, but when everyone moves forward together.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. What does the Supreme Court ruling mean for digital access?
   The ruling recognizes digital access as a fundamental right, ensuring that all individuals have the opportunity to connect, learn, and participate in the digital world, regardless of their socioeconomic background.
    
2. How will this ruling impact marginalized communities?
   This landmark decision aims to bridge the digital divide by mandating more inclusive access to technology, internet connectivity, and digital resources for underserved populations.
    
3. What specific rights does this ruling protect?
   The ruling covers essential digital rights, including affordable internet access, digital literacy programs, public internet spaces, and protection against digital discrimination.
    
4. When will these changes be implemented?
   While the ruling is immediate, full implementation will be a phased process involving government agencies, telecommunication providers, and community organizations to ensure comprehensive digital inclusion.
    
5. How can individuals benefit from this ruling?
   Individuals can expect improved access to online education, job opportunities, government services, healthcare information, and overall increased digital participation in social and economic spheres.