Marriage does not eclipse right to privacy under Aadhaar Act: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court recently set aside a single-judge order directing the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) to reconsider a woman’s application for details of her husband’s Aadhaar card under the Right to Information Act (RTI Act)..The division bench of Justice Sunil Dutt Yadav and Justice Vijaykumar A Patil also observed that a relationship in the form of marriage does not eclipse the right to privacy of a person, which is also recognised under the Aadhaar Act..“The right to privacy of Aadhaar number holder preserves the autonomy of the individual’s right to privacy which is conferred primacy and admits of no exception under the statutory scheme. The relationship by marriage which is a union of two partners does not eclipse the right to privacy which is the right of an individual and the autonomy of such individual’s right stands recognized and protected by the procedure of hearing contemplated under Section 33,” the Court said..The Court reasoned that such a right is protected by the procedure of hearing contemplated under Section 33 of Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016.Section 33 allows a High Court judge to order for the disclosure of identity information or authentication records after providing opportunity of hearing to the UIDAI and the Aadhaar number holder.“The marriage by itself does not do away with the procedural right of hearing conferred under Section 33 of Aadhaar Act,” the Court held..In this case, the division bench concluded that the single-judge could not have remitted the matter to the UIDAI as the power of holding a hearing and arriving at a decision under Section 33 is vested with a court not inferior to a High Court.“The marriage by itself does not do away with the procedural right of hearing conferred under Section 33 of Aadhaar Act. Aadhaar Act, which lays emphasis on the importance to the right to privacy and the same cannot be diluted by delegating the same to an inferior Authority," the Court explained. .The order was passed in a case where a woman sought the Aadhaar details of her husband with whom she was engaged in a matrimonial dispute. A family court had earlier directed her husband to pay her and their daughter a certain amount of monthly maintenance. However, the woman could not enforce the maintenance order as the whereabouts of her husband were not known. Therefore, she had approached the UIDAI under the Right to Information Act (RTI) for information related to the address details in her husband’s Aadhaar. The UIDAI said that only a High Court judge can take a decision on this issue.In February this year, a single judge of the Karnataka High Court directed the UIDAI to issue notice to the woman’s husband and after hearing him, reconsider the wife's RTI application. The UIDAI challenged the order in an appeal before the division bench of the High Court..The division bench concluded that the matter could not have been sent back to the UIDAI and that it could only have been heard by the High Court or a superior court. The division bench, therefore, remitted the case back to the single-judge. The division bench also said that the woman’s husband should be arrayed as a respondent in the case.“A copy of the order is to be marked to the Registrar, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru for necessary attention,” the division bench added..Advocate Shivraj S Balloli represented the appellants, the Deputy Director General and the Central Public Information officer of the UIDAI.Advocate Mallikarjunswamy B Hiremath represented the respondent (wife)..[Read Judgment]