Aadhaar, PAN, Voter ID not proof of citizenship: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday observed that one does not become a citizen of India merely by possessing documents such as an Aadhaar card, PAN card or Voter ID card [Babu Abdul Ruf Sardar v The State of Maharashtra]..A single Bench of Justice Amit Borkar made the observation while denying bail to an alleged Bangladeshi national accused of illegally entering India and obtaining government identity documents by fraudulent means. The accused had claimed that he had valid Indian ID documents such as Aadhaar card, Voter ID, PAN Card, and Passport, which were linked to his income tax records, bank accounts, utility payment bills and business registration. However, the Court noted that the mere possession of these documents is not sufficient to prove Indian citizenship. "In my opinion, the Citizenship Act, 1955 is the main and controlling law for deciding questions about nationality in India today. This is the statute that lays down who can be a citizen, how citizenship can be acquired, and in what situations it can be lost. Merely having documents such as an Aadhaar Card, PAN Card, or Voter ID does not, by itself, make someone a citizen of India. These documents are meant for identification or availing services, but they do not override the basic legal requirements of citizenship as prescribed in the Act," Justice Borkar held. .The Court proceeded to deny bail to the accused after taking note of the gravity of the allegations against him, and on finding some force in the State's apprehension that he may abscond if released from jail. "The applicant has failed to produce any document duly verified or authenticated by the concerned government authorities that could conclusively establish his Indian citizenship. Merely relying on the existence of certain identity documents such as Aadhaar, PAN, or Voter ID, without verification of the process through which these were obtained, cannot be treated as sufficient proof of lawful citizenship at this stage, particularly when the very authenticity of such documents is under investigation," the Court further said. The Court, however, added that the accused may revive his plea for bail if the trial against him is not concluded within one year..According to the prosecution, the accused man, identified as Babu Abdul Ruf Sardar, had entered India without valid travel documents, suppressed his foreign nationality and procured forged Aadhaar and PAN cards.A mobile phone recovered from him allegedly contained digital copies of birth certificates of himself and his mother, purportedly issued in Bangladesh.Investigation also revealed frequent communication with multiple numbers linked to Bangladesh..The Court was further told that the verification of his Aadhaar card from the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) was pending. The prosecution expressed concerns that the accused may be part of a larger network involved in illegal immigration and identity fraud.The accused maintained that he was a bona fide Indian citizen with valid government-issued documents.He claimed the birth certificate found on his phone was unverified, sent via WhatsApp from an unknown number, and that his continued custody was unnecessary as nothing remained to be recovered from him..The Court, however, noted that the allegations against him were not limited to a mere technical violation of immigration norms, but hinted at a case of deliberate identity concealment and the creation of forged documents for obtaining Indian citizenship benefits.It further found that the material on record, including the digital copies of birth certificates recovered from the accused’s phone, could not be ignored at this stage and warranted further investigation. It also accepted the prosecution’s concerns about the risk of the accused absconding."This Court believes that the fear expressed by the prosecution is not an empty or imaginary fear. It is supported by the applicant’s alleged past actions and the serious nature of the accusations. The danger of the applicant running away from the law or interfering with the investigation is real, and for this reason also, this is not a case where bail should be granted at this stage," the Court said. .Advocate Jyotiram S Yadav applied for SardarAdditional Public Prosecutor Megha Bajoria appeared for the State.[Read Order].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.