IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
N.S. SHEKHAWAT, J.
Sher Khan@Sheru – Applicant
Versus
State of Haryana & Ors. – Respondents
CRM-W NO. 1526 of 2022 IN CRWP-1524 of 2016
Decided On : 28-02-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background regarding missing girl. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments on uidai's refusal to disclose information. (Para 2 , 4) |
| 3. court's observation on status report and investigation. (Para 3 , 5 , 6) |
| 4. legal framework guiding uidai's information disclosure. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. supreme court's interpretation of privacy and aadhaar. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 6. clarification on interim order as non-precedent. (Para 13) |
| 7. court's directive for uidai to provide information. (Para 14 , 15) |
JUDGMENT
N.S.Shekhawat, J.
The petitioner/applicant has moved the instant application with a prayer to direct the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) to provide the requisite information regarding the updation of Aadhaar Card No.380791154552 of his missing daughter namely, Rukhsana to the Special Investigating Team of District Yamuna Nagar, which has been constituted to investigate the offence in case FIR No.323, dated 06.06.2016 under Section 365 IPC Police Station City Jagadhari.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner/applicant contended that while preparing the family ID of the members of the petitioner, he came to know that Aadhaar Card bearing No. 380791154552 of his missing daughter namely Rukhsana had been used somewhere in Punjab. In this regard, the petitioner had submitted an application dated 03.09.2021 and an affidavit dated 01.03.2022 before the SHO Police Station, City Jagadhari and DSP, Headquarter Jagadhari and the police also recorded the statement of petitioner in this regard. He further contends that the police had further verified the information provided by the petitioner regarding the updation of address in Aadhaar Card of missing daughter Rukhsana and the Superintendent of Police, Yamuna Nagar moved a letter No. 9082 dated 23.02.2022 to the Director, UIDAI, Chandigarh with a request to provide the information of the address of Rukhsana and her mobile number linked with Aadhaar Card No.380791154552, so that the missing girl might be traced. However, while referring to the provisions of Section 33 (1) of the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the Aadhaar Act), the said authority had refused to supply the desired information to the police. Learned counsel further contends that without specific orders by this Court, the UIDAI authority would not provide any information, which is necessary to trace his missing daughter.
3. During the proceedings of the present case, a status report dated 27.02.2023 by way of affidavit of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Yamuna Nagar was filed before this Court. It was stated that a new Special Investigation Team headed by DSP, Headquarters, Yamuna Nagar had been constituted on 22.02.2023. After the constitution of the SIT, best efforts were made to recover Rukhsana daughter of the petitioner and the police also went to village Gaju, Patiala Punjab and enquiry was made regarding the missing girl, but her whereabouts could not be known. During the course of investigation, it was also found that the Aadhaar card of the missing girl namely, Rukhsana had been found activated but the whereabouts of the said person had not been found. It was also stated that a letter No. 9082, dated 23.02.2022 had been written to the Director, UIDAI, Regional Officer, Chandigarh to supply the information of Aadhaar Card holder and address and mobile number of the missing girl. But the Section Officer, Ministry of Electronic & IT, Government of India, UIDAI, Chandigarh had intimated that the Aadhaar Act, 2016, restrained the sharing of information procured from Aadhaar number holders except as per the provisions of Aadhaar Card. The DSP also annexed the copy of the letter dated 24.02.2022, whereby UIDAI had refused to supply the desired information. Apart from that, the DSP Yamuna Nagar also filed an affidavit dated 26.03.2022, before this Court with a prayer to direct UIDAI to provide the requisite information as so
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.
Own Aadhaar enrolment documents not 'information' under RTI; access to own data via online portals only; third-party Aadhaar data non-disclosable except by superior court order; Aadhaar Act prohibiti....
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.