Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 5887
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
VALMIKI MENEZES, J
State of Goa, Through the Police Inspector, Anjuna Police Station – Appellant
Versus
Unique Identification Authority of India, Government of India – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (MAIN) NO.13 OF 2025
For the Applicant: Mr. S.G. Bhobe, Public Prosecutor
For the Respondents: Mr. Omkar Bhave, Mr. Vibhav Amonkar
The court ruled that demographic information can be disclosed for investigation purposes under the Aadhaar Act, affirming that it doesn't violate privacy rights.
Headnote:(A) Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 - Section 33(1) - Disclosure of demographic information sought by the State against a foreign national - The Court allowed the request citing the necessity of information for ongoing criminal investigations related to possession of contraband and illegality in Aadhaar issuance. (Paras 1, 8, 17)
(B) Privacy Rights - The Respondent's claim that disclosure breaches fundamental rights under Article 21 was evaluated, and the court ruled that the proportionality test does not apply as no personal documents would be revealed through the requested information. (Paras 16)
Facts of the case:
The State pursued an application for disclosures related to a foreign national's Aadhaar issuance amidst ongoing criminal charges, emphasizing the need for legality in residency documentation.
Findings of Court:
The court permitted the disclosure, citing relevance to criminal investigations concerning the undocumented residence of a foreign national.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant made a case for disclosure of information under Section 33 of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the demographic information sought is essential for investigation and does not infringe privacy rights since it does not involve personal documents.
Result: The application is allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. legal procedure for information disclosure under the aadhaar act. (Para 2 , 8) |
| 2. privacy rights claimed against the disclosure of demographic information. (Para 3 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. interpretation of residency and eligibility for aadhaar card issuance. (Para 9 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. court's final order on the disclosure of information. (Para 17) |
JUDGMENT:
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, application is disposed of finally. This is an Application filed by the State, through the Police Inspector, Anjuna Police Station, for an order in terms of Section 3 3 (1) of the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies Benefits and Services) Act 2016 (“the Act”), for disclosure of the demographic information of the Respondent No.3, submitted by him at the time of enrolment for an Aadhaar card, documents, and other information submitted by the Respondent No.3 herein in proof thereof and for the details of the enrolment agency authorized by the Respondent No.1, through which the enrolment came to be done.
2. The case of the Applicant, as stated in the application and the additional affidavit supporting the application dated
14.07.2025 is as under:
a. That, an F.I.R No.12/2025 dated 05.04.2025 was registered by the Anti Narcotic Cell, Panaji under Sections 20(b)(ii)(B), 21 (b) of the NDPS Act against the Respondent 3 for being in illegal possession of 50.00 grams of contraband suspected to be Cocaine and 120 grams of substance suspected to be Charas, pursuant to raid conducted by Anti Narcotic Cell, Panaji on 04.04.2025 from 23.25 hrs to 3.30 hrs of
05.04.2025.
b. During investigation, it was found that Respondent No.3, who is admittedly an Israeli National, was staying in Goa/India without any valid passport or valid visa issued by the Indian authorities, but had been issued an Aadhaar card bearing no. 8368 4349 1046 on 11.08.2021; this Aadhaar card was handed over to the investigating authorities by one of the witnesses.
c. A second complaint dated 06.04.2025 was filed by PSI Deendayal of Anti Narcotic Cell Police Station with Anjuna Police Station against Respondent No.3, wherein F.I.R. No.61/2025 was registered under section 7(1), 7(3)(iii) of the Foreigners Order Act, 1948 and Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946. This F.I.R. discloses that the Respondent No.3 was a permanent resident of Tel Aviv, Israel and was found staying in Goa/India without possessing valid travel documents (passport and visa).
d. That since an Aadhaar card could be issued only to a person who was a resident in India, the same could not have been obtained by the Respondent No.3, who was a foreign national, without having a valid passport and valid residence visa for the requisite period, to show him to be eligible to obtain an Aadhaar card, as on 08.04.2025; accordingly, an email was sent to the Assistant Director General, UIDIA, requesting for disclosure of documents as proof of residence, submitted by the Respondent No.3 to obtain the Aadhaar card, which request was rejected on 11.04.2025 by the Deputy director of UIDAI, RO, Mumbai; the rejection was on grounds of restrictions imposed by provisions of section 33 of the Act.
3. This Court, after notice was issued to the Respondents, including Respondent No.3, vide its order dated 09.06.2025, directed the UIDAI and Respondent No.2 to produce the documents on the basis of which the Aadhaar card was issued, under sealed cover, which were placed on record on 19.06.2025; the Respondent no.3 filed his affidavit in reply dated 09.07.2025 vehemently opposing the said Petition, on grounds that if the information sought was released to the Applicant, the fundamental rights of right to privacy, of the Respondent No.3 under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, would be violated. In the reply, Respondent No.3 contended that disclosure of information related to biometric and demographic data of the Respondent is an essential component of his personal liberty and such disclo
