Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
The Indian Penal Code And Section 6 Of The ... vs In Re: Jakir Hossain Molla on 8 September, 2023
08.09.2023
Sl. No.12
akd
[Adjourned]
C. R. M. (DB) 4523 of 2022
In Re: An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure filed on 14.12.2022 in connection with Taratala Police
Station Case No.192 of 2014 dated 15.09.2014 under Section 376D of
the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
And
In Re: Jakir Hossain Molla
... ... Petitioner
Mr. Deepak Prahladka
Ms. Reshmi Khatun
... ... for the petitioner
Mr. Apalak Basu
Mr. Swastik Samaddar
Ms. Sanghamitra Mridha
... ... for Sanlaap
Mr. Saswata Gopal Mukherji .. ld. Public Prosecutor
Mr. Rudradipta Nandy .. ld. Addl. Public Prosecutor
Mr. Joydeep Roy .. Jr. Govt. Advocate
Mrs. Sujata Das
... ... for the State
Mr. Arun Kumar Maity
Mr. Manabendranath Bandyopadhyay
... ... for the UOI
Mr. Rudradipta Nandy .. ld. Addl. Public Prosecutor
... ... for DWCD & SW
1.The missing person is a victim of sexual offence.
2. During hearing of the bail application of an accused, it came to the notice of this court that the victim was untraceable. The court directed investigation by a special investigating team under the auspices of the Commissioner of Police, Kolkata to trace out the victim. In course of investigation, the investigating team was of the view that the biometrics of the victim may have been used to prepare fraudulent identity documents. Accordingly, letter was issued to the appropriate authorities of UIDAI to disclose the identity particulars of the victim including her biometrics. Such prayer was 2 declined in view of the embargo under the Aadhaar Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act').
3. Notice was issued upon the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI).
4. Mr. Arun Kumar Maity, learned Advocate appears on behalf of the UIDAI authorities and submits report.
5. Section 28 of the said Act enjoins the authority shall ensure confidentiality of the identity information and authentication records of individuals. Section 29 puts an embargo on the authority and its official from sharing core biometrics information.
6. Section 33 of the said Act lays down the exception to the rule of confidentiality. It provides that the restrictions on disclosure of information including identity or authentication records may be lifted pursuant to an order passed by a Judge of the High Court. However, such order would not entitle sharing of core biometrics information.
7. Learned Public Prosecutor submits the Investigating Agency does not wish to obtain core biometrics information. It wants information from the UIDAI authorities whether the same biometrics information was utilised to generate another Aadhaar card to mask the identity of the missing person.
8. This court is of the opinion that disclosure of the aforesaid information would not require UIDAI authorities to share core biometrics information of the missing victim with the Investigating Agency.
9. On the other hand, disclosure of information whether any Aadhaar card apart from the one in possession of the Investigating Agency was generated on the basis of core biometrics of the missing person is most vital for progress of investigation. In the event, a subsequent Aadhaar card was generated on the basis of same biometrics, its 3 footprints/user requires to be pursued to trace out the missing person. It may be apposite to note parents of the missing girl have submitted their consent for sharing her confidential information with the Investigating Agency in order to find out her whereabouts.
10. Accordingly, this Court directs all information including Aadhaar number and demographic information regarding generation of any other Aadhaar card on the basis of core biometrics utilised for generating Aadhaar No. 991765046212 shall be shared with the Investigating Agency. Demographic and other identity information apart from core biometrics relating to Aadhaar No. 991765046212 shall also be shared with the Investigating Agency.
11. Investigating Officers to whom this data would be shared shall give undertaking before this court as well as before the UIDAI authorities that such data shall be used only for the purpose of investigation and for no other purpose.
12. All authorities including Director, Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), West Bengal shall act in terms of this order.
13. Let the matter appear under the same heading on 24.11.2023.
14. Further report be filed on the adjourned day.
(Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)