Jharkhand High Court
Kuldeo Sah @ Mithun Sah vs The State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 11 February, 2025
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad, Navneet Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No.736 of 2023
------
Kuldeo Sah @ Mithun Sah .... .... Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand & Ors. .... .... Respondents With Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1208 of 2023
------
Kuldeo Sah @ Mithun Sah .... .... Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand & Anr. .... .... Respondents With Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1504 of 2023
------
Pappu Sah @ Pappu Kumar Sah .... .... Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR
------
For the Appellant : Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Ashutosh Kr. Sinha, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Lily Sahay, APP
[Cr. Appeal (DB) No.736/2023]
Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, Spl. P.P.
[Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1208/2023]
Mrs. Ruby Pandey, APP
[Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1504/2023]
For the UIDAI : Ms. Shivani Jaluka, AC to DSGI
For the Informant : Mr. Deepak Sahu, Advocate
------
25/Dated: 11.02.2025
1. Affidavit has been filed on behalf of UIDAI.
2. Learned counsel for the UIDAI by placing the same, has submitted that in view of the rider created under Section 33 (1) of Aadhaar Act, 2016, wherein, the requirement to furnish the information including identity information or authentication 1 records is only to be made available after providing an opportunity of hearing to both the Aadhaar number holder and UIDAI number.
3. We have considered the import of Section 33 of Aadhaar Act, 2016, in entirety.
4. Section 33(1) speaks with respect to providing the details of Aadhaar Card having with the proviso that before providing the information including identity information or authentication records, an opportunity of hearing is to be given to the Aadhaar Card holder and the authority, i.e., UIDAI.
5. Sub-section (2) thereof provides that the details of Aadhaar Card can be provided with the permission of the authority, i.e., not below the rank of Secretary to the Govt. of India.
6. The purport of Aadhaar Card has been interpreted by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) & Anr. Vrs. Union of India & Ors., reported in (2019) 1 SCC 1, wherein, the validity of Section 33(1) and (2) of the Act, 2016 have been considered.
7. We have no quarrel upon the said ratio and the purport of aforesaid provision but we are concern, as to how, the child who have been subjected to trafficking, are to be traced out.
8. The details of Aadhaar Card of the victim child has been supplied to UIDAI by the Investigator so as to trace out the location of the victim children through their mobile phones, if they are using.
9. It is the plea of the Investigator that they are not getting any clue 2 and whatever mechanism is to be followed that is only the effort will be in dark and in that direction, we have taken decision to also consider the issue of tracing out the children by making an effort to get the mobile number and for that, the best mechanism would be to have the Aadhaar Card of the children.
10. Since, the question of trafficking of children whose details of Aadhaar Card is to be provided to the Investigator as per requisition made by them but herein, the difficulty as per the statutory mandate is that the Aadhaar Card holder is also to be provided with an opportunity of hearing as per proviso to Section 33(1) of the Act, 2016.
11. The Legislation has taken care of for seeing the instances where the Aadhaar Card holder is not traceable who is involved in any terrorist activities leading to national security then how the situation will be dealt with and for that reason, the provision has been made under sub-section (2) thereof.
12. The said provision confers power upon the authority, UIDAI to seek permission from the competent authority of the Central Government not below the rank of Secretary.
13. The purpose is obvious that there cannot be any compromise with the national security and if any terrorist is to be traced out or his location is to be located, then how, sub-section (1) of Section 33 can be made applicable and for that reason, sub-section (2) has been inserted with Section 33 of the Act, 2016.
14. Here, we are dealing with the case of an offence which is under 3 schedule to the National Investigation Agency Act.
15. The racket is involved in the issue of trafficking and the said racket is to be traced out and for that purpose, clue is required to get the information about the trafficked children.
16. The activities of traffickers are also said to be issue of national security since they are dealing with the future generation, i.e. the young children of the nation jeopardizing the national interest.
17. There might be chances of involvement of such children in terrorist activities leading to threat upon the national security and by that, the Act will come under the fold of Section 15 of the U.A.(P) Act, 1967.
18. As such, this Court is of the view that why emphasis is being given by the authority of the provision of sub-section (1) of Section 33 of the Aadhaar Act, 2016 and why the efforts are not being taken by taking recourse as provided under sub-section (2) of Section 33 of the Aadhaar Act, 2016.
19. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-UIDAI, in view of the above, has sought for a week time to seek instruction on the aforesaid.
20. Accordingly and as prayed for by the learned counsel for the respondent-UIDAI, list these matters on 19.02.2025.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) (Navneet Kumar, J.) Rohit/-
4