Gujarat High Court Directs UIDAI To Disclose Aadhaar Details Of Five Accused Claimed To Be Bangladeshi Nationals
The Gujarat High Court has directed the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) to disclose to the State government, Aadhar card details of five persons, who are claimed to be Bangladeshi nationals, accused of cheating and forgery in a case concerning alleged exchange of forged 100 Riyal currency notes in exchange of Rs. 15,000.
The court passed the order while hearing a plea moved by state government seeking a direction to the court to issue appropriate orders directing the respondent authorities to disclose the information with respect to the Aadhar Card Holders as sought by the investigating agency.
Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar in its order observed,
“Perusing the facts of the complaint as well as the petition, it appears that the information of the accused who does not belong to India and who have forged Aadhar Card and other material documents and to unearth the truth and for coming to logical end of investigation, information is required. Considering bar under The Aadhar Act, 2016 and Aadhar (Amended) Act and other laws, disclosure of information including the identity, authentication of a person is barred but there is no bar under Section 33 of the Aadhar Act, 2016 and the High Court is competent to pass appropriate order in that regard...Considering the aforesaid fact, this Court has the power to pass appropriate directions to the respondent authority to provide the information as required for to ascertain the identity of accused".
Section 33 states, "Nothing contained in sub-section (2) or sub-section (5) of section 28 or sub-section (2) of section 29 shall apply in respect of any disclosure of information, including identity information or authentication records, made pursuant to an order of a court not inferior to that of a [Judge of a High Court]".
The FIR was filed against the five accused persons (respondent no. 2 to 6) at J.P. Road Police Station, Vadodara City under Sections 406 (Criminal Breach of Trust), 420 (Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), 467 (forgery of valuable security, will, or authority to make or transfer property), 468 (Forgery for the purpose of cheating), 471 (Using as genuine a forged document), 114 (Abettor present when offence is committed), 120B (Criminal conspiracy) of IPC and Sections 34 (Penalty for impersonation whether dead or alive by providing false demographic information or biometric information at the time of enrolment), 42 (General penalty) of the Aadhar Act, 2016.
It was alleged that the accused promised the complainant 100 Riyal (Saudi Arabian currency) denomination notes in exchange for ₹15,000 but handed over only two notes thereby committing criminal breach of trust and cheating.
It was alleged that investigation has revealed that respondent Nos.2 to 6 – accused are residents of Bangladesh and have forged some documents and offence is registered under the Aadhar Act, 2016.
It was alleged that investigation revealed that the accused have also forged Aadhar Card and PAN Card which were found from their possession and for the purpose of identification and/or authentication of the Aadhar Card.
The State argued that it was important to get details of the accused persons which can be obtained from the respondent Authority and for that purpose, the State moved the high court as there is bar under Section 28 (Security and confidentiality of information) of the Aadhar Act, 2016.
Also considering bar under Section 29 (Restriction on sharing information) of the Aadhaar Act and in view of right to privacy such information cannot be given unless ordered by the High Court under Section 33 (Disclosure of information in certain cases).
The Court after perusing the facts of the complaint and petition noted the Aadhaar verification is required to aid the investigation, though, the disclosure of identity and authentication data is barred, it can be permitted through the order of the High Court. The Court then referred to the provisions under Section 28 (Security and confidentiality of information), 29 (Restricting on sharing information) and 30 (Biometric information deemed to be sensitive personal Information) of the Aadhaar Act, 2016.
The Court then ordered, “In view of above, respondent No.1 (UIDAI) is directed to provide to the petitioner – State of Gujarat information as sought for by the Investigating Officer in connection with the FIR being I-C.R. No.22/2018 registered with J.P. Road Police Station, Vadodara City.”
With the aforesaid direction, the Court disposed of the petition.
Case Title: State of Gujarat vs Unique Identification Authority of India, UIDAI, Govt. Of India & Ors.
Case No: Criminal Application No. 6051 of 2023