Aadhaar Info Can Be Disclosed In Serious Forgery Cases With Safeguards; Accused Cannot Use Privacy As Shield: Andhra Pradesh High Court
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that Aadhaar-related information may be disclosed for criminal investigation of cases involving serious allegations of forgery with necessary safeguards, observing that a person accused of forgery cannot get away, if he has committed the offence, on ground of protection of his right to privacy.
A Division Bench comprising the Chief Justice Lisa Gill and Justice R. Raghunandan Rao observed that while Section 33(1) of the Aadhaar Act, 2016 places safeguards on disclosure of Aadhaar information, there is no absolute prohibition against release of such information when required for investigation.
The Court observed:
“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. However, such information, as is permissible under the provisions of the Aadhar Act 2016, can be released only after necessary safeguards are in place. It is for that purpose that the release of such information is restricted and is permissible only when an order of a court which is not inferior to a High Court is obtained.
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, if he has committed such an offence, on the ground of protection of his privacy. In any event, the Aadhaar Card is officially said to have been issued in the name of appellant himself. In such circumstances, the question of privacy also may not arise.”
The case arose from a Writ Appeal filed by the appellant claiming ownership over a piece of land. According to the appellant, another individual had impersonated him by creating a fake Aadhaar Card and fraudulently executing two sale deeds in favour of a third party.
Upon discovering the alleged fraud, the appellant lodged an FIR and while also instituting a civil suit seeking declaration that the sale deeds were null and void. An interim injunction was granted restraining interference with the appellant's possession over the land. Subsequently, the District Registrar is also stated to have cancelled the impugned sale deeds.
During investigation, the appellant sought Aadhaar details and biometric information connected to the allegedly forged Aadhaar Card through an application under the Right to Information Act. However, the request was rejected on the ground that disclosure was barred under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005.
The appellant thereafter approached the High Court seeking directions for furnishing of Aadhaar-related information to aid investigation. A Single Judge dismissed the writ petition holding that such information could only be disclosed in accordance with the Aadhaar Act, 2016, and that no request had been made by the investigating authorities.
Challenging the order, the appellant contended before the Division Bench that the investigation into the alleged forgery could not effectively proceed without the Aadhaar information and biometric details.
Accepting the contention, the High Court noted that Section 33(1) of the Aadhaar Act permits disclosure subject to safeguards and appropriate judicial orders. The Court further observed that since the Aadhaar Card had allegedly been issued in the appellant's own name, the question of privacy protection may not strictly arise in the facts of the case.
Accordingly, the Court set aside the order of the Single Judge and directed the concerned authorities to release such Aadhaar-related information as permissible under the Aadhaar Act, 2016, to the investigating officer for purposes of investigation.
Case Title: Shri Sitaramanjaneyulu Elaprolu v. Union of India & Ors.
Case Number: Writ Appeal No. 252 of 2026
Counsel for Appellant: Jhansi Guduru
Counsel for Respondent: GP for Home, G Sai Narayana Rao SC for Central. Govt.