Mumbai: Aadhaar is not a proof of age but only a proof of identity, the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) has informed the Bombay High Court.
UIDAI’s statement came in reply to a petition filed by Pune police seeking information of a murder accused who had two Aadhaar cards with different dates of birth. Pune police had filed a petition seeking that the UIDAI be directed to furnish details of Aadhaar of an accused in a 2020 murder case.
Officials of the Wakad police station in Pune arrested three persons, one from Uttar Pradesh, in 2020 in connection with a murder case. The police seized the Aadhaar card of this person, which indicated that he was born in 1999 and was thus a major at the time of the incident.
However, when the police produced him before the Pune court for remand, the man produced another Aadhaar card, according to which he was born in 2003 and was thus a minor at the time of the incident. Hence, the Pune court ordered that the accused be tried as a minor before the Juvenile Justice Board.
The Pune police did not challenge this order but approached UIDAI seeking documents relied on by the accused for the two Aadhaar cards, as the Aadhaar numbers were the same but the ages were different in the two cards, according to Additional Public Prosecutor Prajakta Shinde.
Police should file case against accused for having 2 Aadhaar cards, says court
A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Gauri Godse suggested that the police should file a case against the accused for having two Aadhaar cards, as it was a case of impersonation.
The bench asked UIDAI’s advocate, Sushil Halwasiya, how Aadhaar cards could be forged to which Halwasiya replied that some experts could do it.
“Then why is it called unique? You must investigate then,” Justice Dere said.
Halwasiya clarified that Aadhaar is not proof of age but only of identity and said that in cases of disputes regarding correctness of date of birth, the burden of proof lies with the Aadhaar number holder.
The bench then asked the Pune police why it had not challenged the Pune court’s order directing the accused to be tried as a juvenile and dismissed the petition.
