The Delhi High Court has sought response of the UIDAI and the city government on the issue of identification of unknown victims of road accidents on the basis of specific characteristics available with the Central Identities Data Repository (CIDR).
It issued notice to the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), Delhi government and member secretary of Delhi State Legal Service Authority and asked them to file their responses in relation to the reference before the next date of hearing on September 27.
The Delhi High Court has sought response of the UIDAI and the city government on the issue of identification of unknown victims of road accidents on the basis of specific characteristics available with the Central Identities Data Repository (CIDR).
The high court issued notice to the authorities on a reference received from the presiding officer of the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal on the matter.
It issued notice to the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), Delhi government and member secretary of Delhi State Legal Service Authority and asked them to file their responses in relation to the reference before the next date of hearing on September 27.
“In view of the legal issue involved, vis a vis identification of unidentified dead bodies at the time of motor accidents, Prashanto Chandra Sen, senior advocate is requested to appear as Amicus Curiae and assist this court,” a bench of Justices Mukta Gupta and Anish Dayal said.
On August 3, MACT Presiding Officer Kamini Lau sent a reference under the provisions of the CrPC to the high court with a request for giving an authoritative finding on certain questions of law relating to identification of deceased victims on the basis of specific characteristics available with the CIDR, which is regulated by UIDAI, for the purposes of guidance.
The CIDR is a government agency that stores and manages data for the Aadhaar project. The CIDR maintains a centralised database in one or more locations containing all Aadhaar numbers issued to Aadhaar holders along with the corresponding demographic information and biometric information of such individuals and other information related thereto.
The MACT presiding officer said while dealing with motor accident claim cases, certain legal impediments have been noticed during investigations which also come in the way of inquiry of cases where the identity of the deceased is 'unknown'.
It said according to the reports received from the Delhi Police, they have been requesting UIDAI for sharing information relating to identity of the unknown victims by way of comparison of biometrics. However, UIDAI is refusing to provide any aid or assistance in this regard by taking refuge of Sections 29 and 33 of the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and other Subsidiaries Benefits and Service) Act 2016 as amended by Aadhaar (and other laws) Amendment Act 2019, it said.
“India is a welfare state where the priority for use of biometrics should be welfare of the individuals/ citizens and not for exclusive purposes of investigations of terror and crime. What useful purpose would the Identities Data Repository serve when UIDAI has refused to share and match the biometric data/ information for ascertaining the identity of unknown deceased who are victims of crime?” the reference stated.
It said it is the right of every citizen of this country to know about the fate of their family members, who are not traceable, and also a corresponding right of an unknown deceased particularly those who are victims of crime that their family be made aware of their fate.
“In cases of victims of crime particularly where a person has expired in an accident, the right relating to benefit of insurance accrues for the dependents of the deceased and hence, there is a need to ensure that the benefit of insurance is duly secured for the dependents of the deceased victim. In the existing scenario, due to the complete non-cooperation of UIDAI, the tribunals have been severely handicapped in effectively reaching to a final conclusion of the inquiry in the given situation,” it said.
The reference said identity of all citizens can be established by matching fingerprints and impressions and eye pupils from national database (UIDAI) which had not been done and added that refusal of junior functionaries of UIDAI to share the database or information of deceased person by comparison of the biometrics of the victim from their database with the police to ascertain the identity of the victim appears to be illegal per-se.
“Such a refusal comes into conflict with the provisions of Indian Penal Code providing that any person being bound by law to render or furnish assistance to any public servant in the execution of his public duty, who intentionally omits to give such assistance, is liable for punishment,” it said.
It said that before amendment under the Act, the power of grant of permission was with the district judge and now it has been vested with the high court and added that the power of judicial review being severely curtailed, the constitutional validity of the said provisions requires to be looked into.
“Where there is a right, there is a remedy and in the absence of any specific provision by the legislature, it is always open to the constitutional courts to intervene and provide remedial measures till such time a proper procedure is brought in place by the legislators.
“The question which arises is whether any high court can give permission and direct comparison of biometrics of unknown deceased victims from the database to ascertain his identity in the light of the amendments,” it said.
The reference further stated that there appears to be a legislative oversight which does not cover this situation materially affecting the fundamental rights of the citizens who have given their demographic and biometric information to the UIDAI.
-With PTI Input