Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
State by Police Inspector, Byatarayanapura Police Station – Appellant
Versus
Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEITY), New Delhi – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
“DIRECT the 2nd Respondent to disclose the information with regard to the victim deceased as provided under Section 33 of the Aadhar Act and amendment thereto as per Section 33(1) of the Aadhar Act 2016 as [amended by the Aadhar and other laws (Amendment) Act 2019 (No.14/2019), dated 07/02/2024 vide Annexure-D, in the interest of justice.”
2. The petitioner is the Byatarayanapura Police Station represented by the Police Inspector, who is undertaking an investigation in Crime No.267/2023, registered for offences under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, wherein a dead body of woman lying in a canal, aged about 25 to 30 years, was found without any identification. The investigation could not proceed further on account of the identity of the deceased not being capable of verification. In that view of the matter, the Station House Officer/Investigating Officer had made out an application to the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) for matching the fingerprint of the deceased with the database of respondent No.2 to ascertain the identity of the deceased.
3. The said request was decline
UIDAI cannot disclose biometric information without a valid court order, and identification requires live biometric data as per privacy and security frameworks established under the Aadhar Act.
The court held that under Section 33 of the Aadhaar Act, UIDAI must provide Aadhaar details to aid in tracing missing trafficking victims, balancing privacy with the need for substantive justice.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a court order, not inferior to that of a High Court Judge, for disclosure of Aadhaar information under Section 33 of the Aadhaa....
The court ruled that in habeas corpus cases, disclosure of personal data, such as Aadhaar information, may be permitted without prior consent due to urgency, provided confidentiality is maintained.
Mandatory Aadhar-based facial recognition attendance is unconstitutional as it violates the right to privacy under Articles 14, 19, and 21 and must be voluntary as per the Aadhar Act.
Habeas Corpus Petition – UIDAI can be directed to provide data to Police when a person is missing and he/she could be in danger.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
