Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JJ
Kuldeo Sah @ Mithun Sah – Appellant
Versus
State Of Jharkhand – Respondent
ORDER :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
1. These appeals originally have been filed under Section 21(4) for a direction for release of the appellants from judicial custody who have been taken into custody for the offence under Section 370/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. We, after calling the case diary, have decided the case on merit and rejected the prayer for bail of the appellants.
3. One of the main reasons for rejection of the prayer for bail of the appellants was that the trafficked minor victims had not been traced out even though serious efforts having been said to be taken even by constituting special investigating teams.
4. This Court has called upon the SPs of the concerned districts, taking into consideration the fact that the victim has not been recovered as yet.
5. Learned counsel representing the State, in course of argument, had submitted that all possible efforts have been taken to trace out the victim but when they have not found any further clue, have taken endeavour to get the details of Aadhar Card of the victim by making correspondences to the authority, i.e., UIDAI, through e-mail/.
6. This Court, on the prayer being made by the learned State counsel, has impleaded the aut
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.
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 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.
Habeas Corpus Petition – UIDAI can be directed to provide data to Police when a person is missing and he/she could be in danger.
(1) Provision of Section 23 of POCSO which protects child victims of sexual abuse from unwarranted intrusion into privacy, harassment and mental agony has to be strictly enforced – Provision cannot b....
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
