Prayer
Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the respondent to share the following 35 Nos.Aadhaar Cards information including genuineness, on the Aadhaar Cards whether they were issued to the same person as found attached with the affidavit details of any updates from the date of issue to till date (Name, Address, Date of Birth and Mobile Number) done to the following 35 Aadhaar Numbers, the details of authorized persons who can make/have made the corrections, the certified copies of the applications along with the KYC documents submitted by the applicants to apply and make the correction and details of genuine for the purpose of completing the investigation in Crime No.01 of 2019 on the file of the petitioner for 35 Aadhaar Numbers.
UIDAI has refused to provide details of the details of the AADHAAR requested by Q branch
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, “Q” Branch CID, Chennai City, Chennai-4 has sought for above informations from the respondent about the of 35 Nos. Aadhaar Card Numbers listed in the petition along with KYC documents submitted by the applicants of the concerned Aadhaar Card. The particulars sought for is required to the petitioner herein in connection with crime relating to fake Indian Passport possessed by Srilankan Nationals. When request by the petitioner herein made to the respondent on 24.06.2019, the respondent vide letter dated 30.07.2019 had expressed its in-ability to provide details citing the Hon’ble Supreme Court Judgment in Justice K.S.Puttaswamy and Another -vs- Union of India (UOI) and Others reported in (2017) 10 SCC 1.
3. The learned counsel for the respondent states that sharing of informations regarding the Aadhaar Card details may amount to breach of the above said Supreme Court Order.
Furnishing of details to ascertain whether AADHAR is genuine or not does not amount to disclosure of privacy details of any individuals
4. This Court considering the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in Justice K.S.Puttaswamy and Another -vs- Union of India (UOI) and Others cited supra relied by the respondent for declining requests of the petitioner, is of the view that the intention of the petitioner herein is primarily to ascertain whether the Aadhaar Cards seized by them in the course of the investigation are genuine or not and thereafter to ascertain on what basis those Aadhaar Cards were issued by the respondent, who are Foreign Nationls. Furnishing of these details are not been prohibited by the Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in Justice K.S.Puttaswamy and Another -vs- Union of India (UOI) and Others cited supra. It does not amount to disclosure of the privacy details of any individuals but to probe whether there is any such individual at all.
As per section 33 of AADHAAR Act disclosure of information in the interest of national security is permitted
5. In this regard, it is brought to the notice of this Court by the Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent that under Section 33 of the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016, disclosure of information in certain cases is permitted in the interest of national security. Reliance on the judgment of Delhi High Court in The State, Govt of NCT of Delhi -vs- Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) in Crl.M.C.No.3314/2021 vide order dated 20.01.2022 made by the Government Advocate (Crl.Side) to buttress his submission.
7. The above said Section enables the High Court to order an disclosure of information including the identity and authentication information of the Aadhaar Card holder. The information sought by the petitioner for investigation falls within the definition of “Identity Information” as per Section 2(n) of the Act, which reads as below:- 2. D
8. If the Aadhaar Card itself is not genuine, it is open to the respondent to inform the petitioner herein that the Aadhaar Card is a fake document and not issued by them. By refusing to furnish the details sought for by the investigating agency which is permissible under law and not against the direction issued in the Judgment of Supreme Court, the due process of investigation of a serious crime gets stale. The reason of the respondent to refuse information to the petitioner herein is not justified as the information sought for is for investigation of crime.
Direction issued to furnish details sought for by the Q branch
9. Hence, the respondent is hereby directed to furnish details sought for by the petitioner herein within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If any particulars could not be furnished, the reasons be stated to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed.
Party
The Deputy Superintendent of Police, “Q” Branch CID, Chennai City, Chennai-4 … Petitioner vs. The Deputy Director Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), 3 rd Floor South Wing, Khanija Bhavan, No.49, Race Course Road, Bengaluru-560 001. .. Respondent, dated on 21st April, 2022; Crl.O.P.No.193 of 2020; Coram: The Hon’ble Dr. Justice G.Jayachandran.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/index.php/casestatus/viewpdf/651294
