Gujarat High Court Directs UIDAI To Disclose Aadhaar Details Of Five Accused Claimed To Be Bangladeshi Nationals
The Gujarat Excessive Court docket has directed the Distinctive Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) to open up to the State authorities, Aadhar card particulars of 5 individuals, who’re claimed to be Bangladeshi nationals, accused of dishonest and forgery in a case regarding alleged change of solid 100 Riyal foreign money notes in change of Rs. 15,000.
The court docket handed the order whereas listening to a plea moved by state authorities in search of a path to the court docket to concern applicable orders directing the respondent authorities to reveal the knowledge with respect to the Aadhar Card Holders as sought by the investigating company.
Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar in its order noticed,
“Perusing the details of the criticism in addition to the petition, it seems that the knowledge of the accused who doesn’t belong to India and who’ve solid Aadhar Card and different materials paperwork and to unearth the reality and for coming to logical finish of investigation, info is required. Contemplating bar below The Aadhar Act, 2016 and Aadhar (Amended) Act and different legal guidelines, disclosure of knowledge together with the id, authentication of an individual is barred however there isn’t any bar below Part 33 of the Aadhar Act, 2016 and the Excessive Court docket is competent to go applicable order in that regard…Contemplating the aforesaid truth, this Court docket has the ability to go applicable instructions to the respondent authority to offer the knowledge as required for to establish the id of accused“.
Part 33 states, “Nothing contained in sub-section (2) or sub-section (5) of part 28 or sub-section (2) of part 29 shall apply in respect of any disclosure of knowledge, together with id info or authentication data, made pursuant to an order of a court docket not inferior to that of a [Judge of a High Court]“.
The FIR was filed towards the 5 accused individuals (respondent no. 2 to six) at J.P. Street Police Station, Vadodara Metropolis below Sections 406 (Prison Breach of Belief), 420 (Dishonest and dishonestly inducing supply of property), 467 (forgery of worthwhile safety, will, or authority to make or switch property), 468 (Forgery for the aim of dishonest), 471 (Utilizing as real a solid doc), 114 (Abettor current when offence is dedicated), 120B (Prison conspiracy) of IPC and Sections 34 (Penalty for impersonation whether or not useless or alive by offering false demographic info or biometric info on the time of enrolment), 42 (Basic penalty) of the Aadhar Act, 2016.
It was alleged that the accused promised the complainant 100 Riyal (Saudi Arabian foreign money) denomination notes in change for ₹15,000 however handed over solely two notes thereby committing felony breach of belief and dishonest.
It was alleged that investigation has revealed that respondent Nos.2 to six – accused are residents of Bangladesh and have solid some paperwork and offence is registered below the Aadhar Act, 2016.
It was alleged that investigation revealed that the accused have additionally solid Aadhar Card and PAN Card which have been discovered from their possession and for the aim of identification and/or authentication of the Aadhar Card.
The State argued that it was essential to get particulars of the accused individuals which will be obtained from the respondent Authority and for that function, the State moved the excessive court docket as there may be bar below Part 28 (Safety and confidentiality of knowledge) of the Aadhar Act, 2016.
Additionally contemplating bar below Part 29 (Restriction on sharing info) of the Aadhaar Act and in view of proper to privateness such info can’t be given until ordered by the Excessive Court docket below Part 33 (Disclosure of knowledge in sure circumstances).
The Court docket after perusing the details of the criticism and petition famous the Aadhaar verification is required to help the investigation, although, the disclosure of id and authentication knowledge is barred, it may be permitted by the order of the Excessive Court docket. The Court docket then referred to the provisions below Part 28 (Safety and confidentiality of knowledge), 29 (Limiting on sharing info) and 30 (Biometric info deemed to be delicate private Info) of the Aadhaar Act, 2016.
The Court docket then ordered, “In view of above, respondent No.1 (UIDAI) is directed to offer to the petitioner – State of Gujarat info as looked for by the Investigating Officer in reference to the FIR being I-C.R. No.22/2018 registered with J.P. Street Police Station, Vadodara Metropolis.”
With the aforesaid path, the Court docket disposed of the petition.
Case Title: State of Gujarat vs Distinctive Identification Authority of India, UIDAI, Govt. Of India & Ors.
Case No: Prison Utility No. 6051 of 2023
