Delhi High Court - Orders
State vs Unique Identification Authority Of ... on 11 February, 2021
Author: Rajnish Bhatnagar
Bench: Rajnish Bhatnagar
$~27
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 83/2021
STATE .... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Rajni Gupta, APP for the State
Versus
UNIQUE IDENTIFICATION AUTHORITY OF INDIA UIDAI &
ANR. ....Respondents
Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Adv., for R-1.
Respondent No. 2 in person with Mr.
Satish Arya Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNISH BHATNAGAR
% ORDER
11.02.2021
The hearing has been conducted through Video Conferencing.
1. By way of the present petition, the petitioner is seeking the following reliefs:
"a) Allow the present petition and issue appropriate orders directing Respondent No. 1 to disclose the information with respect to the Aadhaar No. "5397-1082-4389" sought by the investigation agency for investigation of case with FIR No. 993/2020, under section 354/354(D)/376/416/420/ 467/468/469/471/506/509/120B/34 Indian Penal Code, P.S. Nangloi.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 30.09.2020 FIR bearing No. 993/2020 dated 30.09.2020 was registered Under Section 354/354(D)/376/416/420/467/468/469/471/506/509/120B/34 IPC on the complaint received under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. at police station Nangloi filed on behalf of complainant Mrs. Sangeeta wherein she stated that three accused persons namely ASI Vijay Kumar and SI Ajay Kumar, who are posted in MCD Narela Zone alongwith one Ravi who represented himself as a vigilance officer in MCD, cheated her and raped her on the pretext of getting job in MCD. Accused Ravi took her Aadhar Card on the pretext of job formalities. The accused person took Rs. 3,00,000/- from the victim/respondent No. 2 on the pretext of getting her a job in MCD, by taking Rs. 1,50,000/-in April 2018 and Rs. 1,50,000/- on 29.03.2019 and made her sign blank papers. She was even appointed at MCD Ward 37 by accused Ravi, wherein she worked for 3 months but did not receive any salary and she was told that her salary would be transferred in her account.
3. Complainant further stated in her complaint that accused Ravi also made a forged Aadhar Card of the victim/respondent No. 2 in the name of "Savita, W/o Sh. Rajinder, D/o Om Prakash" by using her photo and Aadhar number and opened her account using the forged Aadhar Card. The complainant further stated that a letter was issued to her by the accused person by overwriting her signature by writing Savita instead of Sangeeta. She further stated that after that whenever she used to visit MCD office Accused Ravi and Vijay made physical relations with her in the evening on the pretext of getting her permanent job. She also stated that accused person has committed similar fraud with other people as well. Complainant further stated that her neighbours Uma and Preeti has also given 1.5 lakhs each to accused Ravi and Vijay for their job in MCD and similar fraud has been done with them as well.
4. On 19.10.2020 Notice under Section 91 Cr.P.C was sent by the investigating officer to the Deputy Director General, UIDAI Regional office, Govt. of India, Bangla Sahib Road, Behind Kali Mandir, Gole Market, New Delhi and the Deputy Director General of UIDAI Regional Office, Ground Floor, Pragati Maidan Metro Station, New Delhi to verity the authenticity of the Aadhar card of the complainant/victim.
5. The investigating officer received reply wherein it was stated that the only exception to the restrictions on sharing of information is provided under section 33(1) of Aadhar Act 2016 as amended by the Aadhaar (and others laws) Amendment Act 2019, was that any disclosure of information (other than core biometric information), including identity, information or authentication records can only be made pursuant to an order of a court not inferior to that of a judge of a High Court after giving opportunity of hearing to both UIDAI and the concerned Aadhaar number holder.
6. Further the URL of website of UIDAI was also provided to verify the Aadhar Card i.e., https://resident.uidai.gov.in/verify. However, after browsing this URL, it was found that from this URL investigating agency could only verify the fact whether the concerned Aadhar number is existed or not, age band 30-40 & gender status.
7. It is stated by the petitioner (State) that the required information is essential for the case such as complete details of the person whom the said Aadhar Card number was allotted and if the said Aadhar Card was updated in any manner, when it was up dated and at which Centre it was updated and the details with documents could not be retrieved, hence the present petition.
8. In the instant case, the petitioner is seeking information in regard to the Aadhar Card bearing No. "5397-1082-4389" which has been issued originally in the name of Mrs. Sangeeta i.e. respondent No. 2. As per the allegations accused Ravi made forged Aadhar card of respondent No. 2 in the name of Savita W/o Rajinder D/o Om Prakash by using her photo and Aadhar card number and using the same he got opened her bank account. During investigation the IO sought certain information in regard to this Aadhar card of respondent No. 2 and notice U/s 91 Cr.P.C was sent to the Deputy Director General, UIDAI Regional Office, Government of India. The same was replied by the Deputy Director vide letter dated 28.10.2020 stating therein that any disclosure of information including identity information or authentication record can be made pursuant to an order of an Court not inferior to that of a Judge of a High Court after giving opportunity of hearing to both the UIDAI and concerned Aadhaar number holder which is the requirement as per Section 33 (1) of the Aadhaar Act.
9. Aadhaar Card holder is also present and she states that she has no objection to the disclosure of information in regard to her Aadhaar Card to the investigating officer.
10. Since the investigation is in regard to forged Aadhaar card of respondent No. 2 who has got registered FIR U/s 354/354(D)/376/416/420/467/468/469/471/506/509/120B/34 IPC and the Aadhaar Card holder of the Aadhaar No. in question has also no objection to the disclosure of information in regard to her Aadhaar card to the investigating officer, therefore, in these circumstances, the petition is allowed and respondent No. 1 is directed to disclose the information as sought by the investigating officer with respect to the Aadhar No. "5397- 1082-4389". With these directions, the petition stands disposed of.
RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, J FEBRUARY 11, 2021 Sumant