Impossible to compare fingerprints of the dead with Aadhaar database, UIDAI tells Madras High Court
In a counter affidavit filed before Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan, the UIDAI said, the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 imposes severe restrictions on sharing information. Further, there were technology constraints in culling out information about the dead, it added.
The submissions were made in response to a writ petition (criminal) filed by the State of Tamil Nadu represented by a Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tindivanam Sub Division, Villupuram district, seeking a direction to the UIDAI to provide the demographic details of an unidentified body using its fingerprints.
Central government senior panel counsel K. Srinivasamurthy said, UIDAI was a statutory body functioning under the Union Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEITY). The object of the 2016 Aadhaar Act, as amended in 2019, was to empower residents of India with a unique identity proof.
The UIDAI issues a 12-digit Aadhaar number after a person undergoes enrolment by submitting demographic as well as biometric information. The prime object of the Aadhaar Act was to ensure targeted delivery of government subsidies, benefits and services to the beneficiaries, the counsel said.
Aadhaar not used to track other activities
He also submitted a counter affidavit signed by UIDAI Deputy Director Priya Sreekumar who asserted that 'Aadhaar number is not used to track other activities of the resident' and that Chapter VI of the Aadhaar Act requires the UIDAI to maintain strict confidentiality with respect to individual records.
She pointed out Section29(1) of the Act categorically states that no core biometric information, collected or created under the Act, should be shared with anyone for any reason whatsoever; or used for any purpose other than generation of Aadhaar numbers and authentication under the Act.
The Deputy Director said, Section 33 (1) states only the identity information or authentication records (but not core biometric information) could be disclosed that too if a High Court or the Supreme Court passes a specific order for such disclosure after hearing the individual concerned as well as the UIDAI.
The only provision which permits sharing of core biometrics too was Section 33(2) which could be invoked in the interest of national security in pursuance of a direction issued by an officer not below the rank of Secretary to Government of India if he/she had been specially authorised through a government order.
Not suitable for forensic purposes
Ms. Sreekumar also said, UIDAI does not collect biometric information (such as iris scan and fingerprints) based on technologies, standards or procedures suitable for forensic purposes and therefore, it would be impossible to cull out data related to an individual from sample fingerprints lifted from a body.
'The Aadhaar technology only permits biometric authentications which are done on a 1:1 basis (where one's biometric is matiched against its own biometrics for verification or authentication) for which it is necessary to have the Aadhaar number of an individual. There are technology constraints in matching the fingerpint collected on paper or other material with the Aadhaar database,' the Deputy Director added.
'In the light of the provisions of the Aadhaar Act, 2016 and the technology constraints, it is most respectfully submitted that it is not possible for UIDAI to compare the sample fingerprints of the deceased with the fingerprint data of UIDAI and provide information to the petitioner,' she said.
After taking the counter affidavit on file, the judge directed the High Court Registry to list the matter again on June 12 for further hearing.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scroll.in
an hour ago
- Scroll.in
Why a court ban on encrypted email service Proton Mail has sparked digital privacy fears
A two-judge bench of the Karnataka High Court is now hearing a challenge filed by Proton AG, the Swiss company that runs the encrypted email service, Proton Mail. On April 29, a single judge of the high court had directed the Union government to block the service in India, setting off a wave of criticism from digital rights advocates. Many of them told Scroll that the court's ban set a dangerous precedent that threatens the privacy of whistle-blowers, activists, journalists, and others who rely on encryption for more secure communications. They said the court had erred in blaming encryption for Proton's alleged non-cooperation with the Karnataka police in its investigation into online harassment by anonymous culprits through its email service. What did the High Court order say? The case began when a Bengaluru-based organisation approached the High Court after some of its female employees were subjected to prolonged online harassment. The company received a torrent of emails from two Proton Mail accounts containing obscene and abusive content, including morphed images of the employees. The company filed a police complaint and reached out to Proton Mail's abuse team. While Proton disabled the offending accounts, it could not provide the company personally identifiable details of the sender of the mail. This is because, it informed the company, under Swiss law, it could only disclose user data upon receiving a formal legal request from Swiss authorities through established international cooperation channels. The police investigation hit a similar wall. The police told the court that they could not identify the culprit through the mutual legal assistance arrangements between India and Switzerland. However, the judgment didn't clarify what specific steps were taken or where those efforts stalled. Nevertheless, Justice M Nagaprasanna took a stern view of the matter in his judgment. Describing the situation as a 'menace', he noted that Proton Mail had also been used to send bomb threats to schools and even to the Chief Minister of Karnataka. 'The State machinery [is] hamstrung by the absence of enforceable cooperation from Proton AG,' Nagaprasanna observed. 'This Court fails to understand the complacency of the Union of India in not taking action towards blocking the Proton Mail…' Concluding that the court could not remain a 'mute spectator', the judge directed the Union government to initiate proceedings to block Proton Mail in India under the Information Technology Act. 'Troubling precedent' As of July 25, Proton Mail was still accessible in India. While the court's intent to protect the victims of harassment is clear, technology lawyers and digital rights advocates raised concerns about the order's sweeping nature and its wider implications. They argue that blocking an entire service used by many for the criminal acts of a few is a disproportionate response that could undermine digital security for everyone. The order 'sets a troubling precedent,' said Raman Jit Singh Chima, Asia Pacific Policy Director at Access Now, a digital civil rights organisation. 'It signals that entire encrypted services can be taken down based on allegations linked to a handful of users.' A ban could lead to a domino effect, warned Apar Gupta, lawyer and founder director of the Internet Freedom Foundation. 'Other encrypted platforms could face pressure to weaken their security or risk being blocked,' he explained. 'This approach may inadvertently chill free expression, as journalists, activists and at-risk communities who rely on encrypted communications for safety might feel less secure.' This view was echoed by technology lawyer and online civil liberties activist Mishi Choudhary. 'In today's day of heightened cyber security issues and surveillance, privacy-protecting technologies are more crucial than ever,' she said. Blocking Proton Mail would not eliminate online abuse either, said technologist and interdisciplinary researcher Rohini Lakshané. 'Malicious actors can simply migrate to other encrypted email providers or deploy additional anonymisation techniques,' she said. The fear is that the High Court's order could give cover to authorities to take a heavy-handed approach towards any platform that offers privacy. 'This move will embolden the bureaucracy and the political powers to act first and think later,' cautioned Tanveer Hasan, executive director of the Centre for Internet and Society, an internet and digital technologies research organisation. As Choudhary noted, 'India cannot be a destination that issues blocking orders at the drop of a hat if investigative authorities aren't able to access some data.' Gupta warned that the order would create legal uncertainty for overseas service providers. 'Those in jurisdictions with strict privacy laws could be caught between home-country obligations and Indian court demands, deterring them from offering services in India,' he said. Encryption versus user identification A key point of contention is the court's conflation of the protection of a message's content with the ability to identify a user. The court identified encryption as a factor for the police's failed investigation – without explaining how. Encrypted services like Proton Mail are prevented from seeing the content of messages sent on their platforms, but may still access user metadata, such as internet protocol address – a unique alphanumerical identifier assigned to each computer connected to the internet – from which an account was created or accessed. Nikhil Narendran, a partner at the law firm Trilegal, argued that the ban was based on a misunderstanding of the technology 'Encryption only protects the content of a message but does not prevent a receiver or sender from disclosing it wilfully,' he explained. 'It also doesn't prevent a company from disclosing user information once the content is disclosed.' This metadata can be a crucial tool for law enforcement to trace the origin of a criminal act. In 2021, Proton Mail handed over the internet protocol address of French Proton Mail users to the French police upon an order by the Swiss government. 'So, the idea that Proton Mail is immune to legal process is simply not true,' Chima said. Sharveya Parasnis, a journalist at the technology policy portal Medianama, questioned the court's invocation of encryption. 'I don't know if the case is about encryption as much as it is about the obligation of foreign companies to comply with Indian law enforcement requests for user data,' he said. The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 mandate that online platforms 'enable the identification' of anyone communicating through the platform upon a government or court order. The right way forward? Experts pointed out that a blanket ban failed the three-part test for restricting fundamental rights laid down by the Supreme Court in its landmark privacy judgment in 2018. Any restriction must be lawful, necessary and, crucially, proportionate. 'Here, less intrusive options clearly existed,' Chima said. He and other experts Scroll spoke with argued that instead of resorting to bans, Indian authorities should strengthen and use existing legal channels. India and Switzerland are both signatories to a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty, a formal mechanism for requesting and obtaining evidence for criminal investigations. The treaty should be reformed 'so investigators can lawfully obtain data in a timely manner,' suggested Gupta. 'Regulators can also establish clear, transparent protocols for engaging with encrypted services based abroad, and even update outdated agreements to address modern cybercrime.' Rahul Narayan, a partner at the law firm Chandhiok & Mahajan who has expertise in privacy and data protection, batted for more legislative clarity in such situations. 'Precise parameters for when a service may be blocked should be laid down in a legislation, rather than decided on an ad-hoc basis by courts,' he said.
The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
Palghar school watchman held for allegedly sexually abusing two minor boys
Police have arrested a 53-year-old security guard of a private school in Maharashtra's Palghar district for allegedly sexually abusing two male students, officials said. The alleged incidents occurred between June 15 and 20, the officials said on Sunday (July 27, 2025). The victims, aged 17 and 15, are students of the same school located in Virar area. "The alleged incidents occurred in the canteen of the school," the Arnala police stated. The accused was arrested on Saturday (July 26, 2025)evening, the police added. "After receiving a complaint from the school's manager, we registered an FIR against the watchman, Raymond Wilson Dias, under section 75 (sexual harassment) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and sections 5, 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act," the Arnala police station official said. Sections 5 of the POCSO Act pertains to penetrative sexual assault. In August 2024, a male sweeper at a school in Badlapur in neighbouring Thane district allegedly sexually abused two four-year-old girls, causing a huge outrage and massive protests. The accused was killed in September last year in the 'retaliatory firing' by police after he allegedly snatched the gun from a policeman in a police vehicle.
Hindustan Times
3 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Eknath Khadse's son-in-law arrested during drug party in Pune
Pune Police on Sunday arrested seven people, including Pranjal Khewalkar, son-in-law of senior NCP (SP) leader Eknath Khadse, after busting an alleged drug party at a studio apartment in an upmarket area of Kharadi. The raid was carried out around 3:40 am following a tip-off received by the Crime Branch. Blood samples of all seven accused have been sent for forensic analysis to determine whether they had consumed narcotics. (HT) According to police, the raid led to the seizure of 2.70 grams of a cocaine substance, 70 grams of ganja, 10 mobile phones, two cars, hookah sets, liquor bottles, and various party paraphernalia—all worth approximately ₹41.35 lakh, police said. Blood samples of all seven accused have been sent for forensic analysis to determine whether they had consumed narcotics. The accused include Khewalkar, a 41-year-old MD in medicine, and husband of NCP (SP) state unit chief of women wing, resident of Hadapsar; along with Nikhil Popatani, 35, involved in the cigarette business; Sameer Sayyad, 41, who works in hardware materials business; Sachin Bhombe, 42, a private employee; Shripad Yadav, 27, a contractor; and two young women identified as Isha Singh, 22, from Aundh, and Prachi Sharma, 23, from Mahalunge. Police said the arrested individuals knew each other and had been in contact through calls and messages. Preliminary findings suggest the group had attended a party at a well-known pub in the city before assembling at the rented studio apartment. Investigators confirmed that three rooms had been booked in the building from July 25 to July 28, each costing ₹10,357 per night. Around 45 minutes before the raid, all seven had gathered in the flat. Following the arrests, police searched Khewalkar's bungalow in Hadapsar, Sai Krupa, and seized laptops, CDs, and other items. Crime Branch officials revealed that Popatani and Yadav have criminal records. Popatani was booked in 2023 by Kondhwa police under IPC sections 420 and 34, and sections 66(c) and 66(d) of the IT Act, reportedly for online betting. Yadav was booked in 2022 by the Bund Garden police under the Maharashtra Prevention of Gambling Act. A Crime Branch officer said an earlier attempt to detain the group on Friday had failed. However, based on fresh information, they moved in on Saturday night and arrested the seven with drug-like substances. 'The police have registered a case under sections 8(c), 21(b), 22(b)(ii)(a), and 27 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, and sections 7(2) and 20(2) of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act (COTPA), at the Kharadi police station,' said deputy Commissioner of Police (Crime) Nikhil Pingale. Police said they are now trying to identify three more people reportedly seen at the apartment during the party,' said NCP (SP) leader Eknath Khadse, reacting to the arrest of his son-in-law, said he had not spoken to him and was aware of the incident only through media reports. 'If a fair investigation reveals it was a rave party and my son-in-law is guilty, I will not defend him. But the police must act impartially. The perception among people is that police can do anything, so let the truth come out through forensic and blood reports,' Khadse said. Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis said he had seen media reports but had not yet received an official briefing. 'Preliminary information suggests that a rave party was busted and some narcotics were found,' he said. Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar said the police were acting as per rules and anyone found guilty would face consequences. MP Supriya Sule also reacted to the case, saying her party stood behind Rohini Khadse, wife of the arrested Khewalkar. Sule expressed concern over the possibility of tampering with reports, especially in light of past incidents at Sassoon Hospital. 'We will ensure a full investigation takes place, but my concern remains with how evidence is handled,' she said. Officials said the investigation is ongoing, with police verifying the identities of others who may have attended the party and reviewing communications.
