Delhi High Court

Delhi High Court: In a petition filed by the State (NCT) of Delhi (‘State’) under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘CrPC’) read with Section 33(1) of the Aadhaar Act, 2016 (‘Aadhaar Act’) seeking directions to verify Aadhaar details of an accused with the data bank of the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), Manoj Kumar Ohri, J., allowed the State’s plea and directed UIDAI to provide the requested Aadhaar information.


The Special Cell had received intelligence implicating the accused in the distribution of counterfeit Indian currency notes. Acting on this information, law enforcement officials apprehended the accused with a significant quantity of fake currency notes in his possession. Subsequently, a First Information Report (‘FIR’) was registered under relevant sections of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’), initiating legal proceedings against the accused.

During the search and subsequent investigation, law enforcement recovered an Aadhaar Card bearing the name of the accused. Additionally, another Aadhaar Card, this time under a different name i.e., ‘Rohit,’ was found in the possession of the accused. It was later determined that the Aadhaar Card under the name ‘Rohit’ was forged and had been utilized for illicit activities, including obtaining a mobile number and making hotel reservations. The legal proceedings progressed with the filing of a chargesheet, while the investigation continued under Section 173(8) of CrPC, concerning the forged Aadhaar Card. Subsequently, a supplementary chargesheet was filed, incorporating additional charges under Sections 489-B/489-C/419/420/468/471/120-B of IPC. In an attempt to verify the details of the forged Aadhaar Card, a letter was dispatched to the Director of the UIDAI. However, the request was declined by UIDAI, necessitating the filing of the present petition before the Court.

Contention of the State

The State relied on Section 33(1) of the Aadhaar Act, which confers upon the Court the authority to order disclosure of information, including identity information or authentication records of Aadhaar cardholders. The State further argued that the information sought was crucial for the investigation and adjudication of the case and asserted that such disclosure did not infringe upon the cardholder’s right to privacy.

Decision and Analysis

After consideration of the submissions as well as facts of the case, the Court opined that justice would be served by providing the information as sought by the State.

Consequently, the Court allowed the petition and directed respondent UIDAI to furnish all relevant information regarding the Aadhaar Number of the accused as sought by the State.

The Court, therefore, allowed the State’s plea, and disposed of the petition.

[State (NCT)of Delhi v. Unique Identification Authority of India, CRL.M.C. 987 of 2023, Order dated 03-05-2024]

Advocates who appeared in this case :

Advocate for the State: Laksh Khanna, APP

Advocates for the State: Advocates Sushil Raaja, Kapil Dev Yadav, Tanushree Chakraborty, Nazim

Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973  HERE

Code of Criminal Procedure

Buy Penal Code, 1860   HERE

penal code, 1860

Must Watch

maintenance to second wife

bail in false pretext of marriage

right to procreate of convict

Criminology, Penology and Victimology book release

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.