In a significant ruling that narrows the defense of privacy in criminal cases, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has declared that individuals accused of forgery and impersonation cannot use privacy rights to evade criminal investigations.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Lisa Gill and Justice R Raghunandan Rao has directed the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) to hand over permissible Aadhaar-related information to police investigators within three weeks. The order, dated May 7, overrules a previous single-judge decision and clears the path for a deeper probe into a fraudulent land transaction.
“In the present case, a person who is alleged to have committed an offence of forgery for personal gain, cannot be permitted to get away with such an offence… on the ground of protection of his privacy,” the division bench observed in its order.
The Anatomy of the Land Fraud
The case traces back to 2021, when an imposter allegedly used a fabricated Aadhaar card to impersonate the appellant and execute two fraudulent land sale deeds.
Once the deception was uncovered, a multi-front legal battle began:
- Criminal Proceedings: A criminal case was registered to investigate the identity theft and forgery.
- Civil Litigation: A civil suit was filed to challenge the validity of the fraudulent sale deeds.
- Property Protection: The court issued an interim injunction restraining the respondents (arrayed as respondents 1 to 3) from interfering with the appellant’s peaceful possession of the land.
- Deed Cancellation: Taking cognizance of a complaint filed by the appellant’s son, the district registrar and inspector of registration offices in Visakhapatnam cancelled the disputed sale deeds.
To solidify the criminal case, the appellant sought the biometric and registration details of the fraudulent Aadhaar card from the UIDAI. However, this request was rejected by the authority.
The Clash Over the RTI Act and Privacy
The UIDAI initially blocked the release of the biometric and card information by invoking Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005. This specific provision exempts the disclosure of personal information that has no relationship to public activity or interest, or which would cause an unwarranted invasion of privacy, unless a larger public interest justifies it.
The appellant’s legal challenge was first dismissed by a single-judge bench. The single judge ruled that under Section 33(1) of the Aadhaar Act, 2016, such disclosures require an order from a court not inferior to a High Court, or must involve matters of national security. The judge also noted that because the Commissioner of Police had not formally applied for the data, the court could not compel the UIDAI to act.
High Court Decides: Forgery Trumps Privacy Claims
On appeal, the division bench rejected the single judge’s strict interpretation. Representing the appellant, advocate G Jhansi successfully argued that the police investigation into the fraudulent deeds would completely fail without the critical identifying data held by the UIDAI. Jhansi emphasized that serious criminals should not be permitted to escape liability under the guise of privacy.
The division bench agreed, clarifying that the Aadhaar Act does not place an absolute embargo on sharing registration details.
“As can be seen from the provisions of Section 33(1) of the Aadhaar Act, 2016, there is no absolute bar for release of such information,” the bench noted. “However, such information, as is permissible under the provisions of the Aadhaar Act 2016, can be released only after necessary safeguards are in place.”
Furthermore, the court pointed out a logical flaw in the defense: because the forged Aadhaar card was issued in the victim’s own name, “the question of privacy also may not arise.”
By ordering the UIDAI to hand over the permissible data to the investigating authorities within three weeks, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has set a firm precedent: the right to privacy cannot be used as a shield to hide the crime of forgery.
