IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.
Prameelamma Vadiaputi - Appellant
Versus
The Inspector General of Registration Officer, Chennai - Respondent
W.P. No. 10658 of 2025
Decided On : 15-04-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court’s order and directive regarding fraudulent documents (Para 1 , 8) |
| 2. property ownership and fraudulent documentation (Para 3) |
| 3. fraudulent registration of property documents. (Para 4) |
| 4. fraudulent actions impact property rights (Para 5) |
| 5. cooperation with police investigation (Para 6) |
| 6. court's findings on document legality. (Para 7) |
ORDER :
1. When this writ petition came up for hearing on 25.03.2025, this Court passed the following order:
1. The Unique Identification Authority of India [UIDAI], Represented by its Chairman, Khanija Bhawan, No.49, III Floor, South Wing, Race Course Road, Bengaluru - 560 001, is suo motu added as seventh respondent in this writ petition.
2. Mr. U. Baranidharan, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 4. Mr. K. Srinivasamurthy, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the impleaded seventh respondent. Notice to respondents 5 and 6 returnable by 15.04.2025. Private notice is also permitted.
3. The specific case of the petitioner is that the subject property belonged to her husband by virtue of a registered sale deed dated 07.02.1981. Her husband died leaving behind the petitioner, three sons and a daughter on 23.01.2017. The grievance of the petitioner is that her husband who was not even alive, was impersonated and a fake/fraudulent Power of Attorney dated 09.07.2021 came to be registered. Based on the same, a sale deed came to be registered dated 16.09.2021 in favour of the fifth respondent. The fifth respondent on the very same day, mortgaged the property with Canara Bank by depositing the title deeds and this document was registered as Document No.11341/2021. This loan was later discharged under receipt dated 17.06.2022. On coming to know of the same, a complaint was given to the police and an FIR came to be registered in Crime No.7/2023, which is pending investigation by CCB, Team-1. Totally six accused persons were arrested in this case and some of them were detained under Act 14 of 1982. The Aadhaar card that stood in the name of petitioner's husband carries Aadhaar number 8146 1471 0439 and whereas the fake Aadhaar Card found at page No.42 of the typed set of papers carries the number 6027 0928 0216.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the impleaded seventh respondent shall take written instructions with respect to the genuineness of the alleged fake Aadhaar card No.6027 0928 0216 that was produced before the third / fourth respondent.
5. Post this writ petition along with W.P.No.1062 of 2025, W.P.No.8801 of 2025 and W.P.No.10273 of 2025 under the caption 'for orders' on 15.04.2025. In the meantime, there shall be a direction to the respondents 3 and 4 not to entertain registration of any document pertaining to the subject property, pending disposal of the writ petition.
2. Pursuant to the above order, notice was sent to the 6th respondent Bank and the 6th respondent Bank is also represented through a counsel.
3. The impleaded 7th respondent has filed an affidavit and the relevant portions are extracted hereunder:
9. It is submitted that the only provision which enables the Authority to disclose the identity information or authentication records of the resident is Section 33 of the Aadhaar Act {read with Regulation 3 of the Aadhaar (Sharing of Information) Regulations, 2016}, which states that the identity information or authentication records of an Aadhaar Number Holder (defined below) can be disclosed by the Authority only after an order to that effect which is passed by the Judge of a High Court. The said Section 33 (1) also provides that such Order of disclosure can only be passed after an opportunity of hearing is provided to the Authority and the concerned Aadhaar Number Holder.
Section 33 - Disclosure of information in certain cases:-
(1) 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 inform
Disclosure of identity information under the Aadhaar Act requires due process and a hearing, especially in cases involving fraud and impersonation, safeguarding individual privacy rights.
The court found that a sale deed executed using a fake identity is illegal and declared it non est, emphasizing the importance of verified identity in property transactions under the Aadhaar 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....
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.
Habeas Corpus Petition – UIDAI can be directed to provide data to Police when a person is missing and he/she could be in danger.
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.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.