IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(Cr.)(HB)(DB) No. 628 of 2025 ------

Chandramuni Urain ... Petitioner Versus Director General of Police, Jharkhand & Ors. ... Respondent CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI ------

For the Appellant : Mr. Shashank Shekhar No. 3, Adv. For the State : Mr. Srikant Swaroop, AC to AAG-II For the UIDAI : Mr. Prashant Pallav, ASGI : Ms. Shivani Jaluka, AC to ASGI ------

10/Dated: 17th February, 2026

1. As would be evident from the order dated 12^th February, 2026, the present case although has been fixed for 25^th February 2026, but as has been referred in the order dated 12^th February, 2026, the State has sought for leave to file an interlocutory application, making prayer therein for the direction upon the UIDAI authority to supply the Aadhar Card details, and in pursuance thereto, the interlocutory application being I.A. No. 2520 of 2026 has been filed.

2. The case therefore has been listed today on board for passing an appropriate order in the said I.A. No. 2520 of 2026.

I.A. No. 2520 of 2026:

3. Mr. Srikant Swaroop, learned AC to AAG-II, appearing for the State, has submitted that there is typographical error in Para-2 of the affidavit portion wherein it has been stated therein “That I am the petitioner in the instant case” in place of referring “That I am the respondent (State) in the instant case”

4. Let the necessary correction be carried out in course of the day.

5. The instant interlocutory application has been filed praying direction upon the respondent No. 6, i.e., the Additional Director General, UIDAI, Ranchi, Jharkhand to give required information as per Section

33(1) of the AADHAR Card Act, 2016.

6. The reason has been assigned in the said interlocutory application and it is submitted that it is a case where the victim, who was minor at the time of trafficking, had been trafficked sometime in the year

2018, and since then, she is traceless.

7. It has been contended that the S.I.T. has been constituted for tracing out of the victim, but due to no clue as yet, the victim could not have been traced out.

8. The S.I.T. has decided to enhance the scope of enquiry in the process of tracing out of the victim and had made an application before the authority of the UIDAI for supply of the details of the Aadhar Card of the victim, if any. The same was taken note in the order dated 12^th February, 2026

9. Mr. Prashant Pallav, learned ASGI, representing the UIDAI, while referring orders dated 11.02.2026 & 12.02.2026, has submitted by taking aid of the order passed by this Court dated 24.02.2025 passed in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 736 of 2023 that the details of the Aadhar Card of the victim can only be supplied by the direction of the High Court, if passed in this regard. The aforesaid aspect of the matter had already been taken into consideration in the aforesaid order.

10. The learned State Counsel, therefore on that date, took time to make a motion for filing appropriate application seeking direction with respect to the same and in terms thereof, the instant interlocutory application has been filed.

11. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties, particularly learned State Counsel and learned A.S.G.I., and gone through the order passed by this Court in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 736 of 2023, wherein we after taking into consideration the statutory mandates as contained under Section 33 of the Aadhar Act, 2016, has passed the following order which is being referred herein:

“32. Since we have already expressed our view that law is for doing substantive justice and we are dealing with the issue of the victim who has not been traced out having been traceless since sometime in the year 2014 and, as such, for the purpose of doing substantive justice towards the parents, more particularly, the victim who is traceless for more than a decade, this Court is of the view that the power which is to be exercised by the High Court as provided under Section 33(1)

of the Act, 2016