Bombay High Court directs UIDAI to share Aadhaar enrolment documents of alleged Bangladeshi infiltrator with police

The State of Maharashtra, through APMC Police Station, Navi Mumbai, registered C.R. No. 4 of 2019 concerning allegations that Respondent No. 3, Mukta Haris Khan, a Bangladeshi national, was residing in India under the assumed name “Mukta Vitthal Bhadgade”.

During the inquiry, she allegedly failed to produce cogent evidence of Indian citizenship, and the police discovered that she had obtained several Indian identity documents, including an Aadhaar Card bearing No. 8943 5708 3153, under the assumed name.

For further investigation, the police sought from the Unique Identification Authority of India (“UIDAI”) the documents and information submitted by Respondent No. 3 for obtaining the Aadhaar Card.

Since Section 29 of the Aadhaar Act generally prohibited disclosure of Aadhaar-related information, the State invoked the High Court’s power under Section 33(1) and Article 226 of the Constitution.

1. Whether the High Court could direct UIDAI to disclose the identity information, authentication records, and supporting documents submitted for obtaining Respondent No. 3’s Aadhaar Card, notwithstanding the confidentiality restriction under Section 29 of the Aadhaar Act.

2. Whether such disclosure was justified for the purpose of investigating C.R. No. 4 of 2019 and placing the relevant documents before the competent criminal court.

The Court applied Article 226 of the Constitution, which empowers the High Court to issue appropriate writs, orders, or directions; Section 29 of the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016, which restricts disclosure of information furnished for Aadhaar enrolment; and Section 33(1), which creates an exception permitting disclosure pursuant to an order of the High Court to a Government agency or other authorised person.

The Court also considered the Aadhaar and Other Laws (Amendment) Ordinance, 2019, as referred to in the judgment.

No judicial precedent was relied upon; the Court additionally referred to its observations in Writ Petition No. 4406 of 2019 concerning inter-agency verification of allegedly fraudulent Aadhaar documents.

The Court found that the police had identified a specific Aadhaar number and had placed material indicating that Respondent No. 3 was allegedly a Bangladeshi national using an assumed identity and possibly relying on forged, fabricated, or fraudulently obtained documents.

Although Section 29 protected Aadhaar-enrolment information from ordinary disclosure, Section 33(1) expressly enabled the High Court to direct disclosure for investigation by a Government agency.

The requested documents were considered directly relevant to determining how the Aadhaar Card had been obtained, identifying the source and authenticity of the supporting documents, and enabling investigation of the alleged offence.

Accordingly, the Court treated the statutory exception as applicable and considered disclosure necessary to prevent investigative delay and facilitate proceedings before the competent court.

The Court directed UIDAI to provide all necessary information and documents submitted by Respondent No. 3 while obtaining Aadhaar Card No. 8943 5708 3153 to the Investigating Officer or another duly appointed investigating officer in C.R. No. 4 of 2019, for investigation and production before the competent jurisdictional court.

The documents were ordered to be handed over within four weeks from the date of uploading of the order on the Bombay High Court’s official website.