Keywords: Delhi High Court, Aadhaar, POCSO, Juvenile Justice
In a recent decision that highlights the ongoing debate over the use of Aadhaar cards as proof of age, the Delhi High Court has upheld a trial court’s ruling in favor of relying on a victim’s Aadhaar card to clear an accused individual of charges under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act). The case, State (GNCT Of Delhi) versus Rohit Kumar, has sparked discussions about the legitimacy of Aadhaar cards as a legal document for age determination. The central issue in this case revolved around the age of the alleged victim. According to the Aadhaar card, the girl was listed as 21 years old, while her mother, in a police complaint, claimed she was 16 years old. The trial court decided to trust the Date of Birth (DoB) mentioned in the Aadhaar card, leading to the discharge of the accused from the POCSO charges.
Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain of the Delhi High Court, upon appeal, supported the trial court’s decision. The High Court’s ruling emphasized the absence of any birth certificate or related documents issued by municipal or similar authorities to support the alternate DoB found in a school record. Given this lack of official documentation, the High Court asserted that the trial court was right in relying on the Aadhaar card to establish the victim’s age. The High Court’s judgment cited the failure of the Investigating Officer to obtain a birth certificate from the school or any other statutory authority and pointed out that a previous bench of the court had referred to the Aadhaar card to determine the age of the victim in another case.
As a result, the High Court dismissed the State government’s appeal against the trial court’s order. The prosecution argued that the trial court had made an error by not resorting to Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which allows for age determination based on various certificates or, in the absence of such documents, through medical tests. In this particular case, the victim had not undergone an ossification test or similar medical examination to approximate her age, as mandated by the law. Despite allegations of kidnapping, rape, and forced marriage, the trial court discharged the accused based on the victim’s Aadhaar-recorded age of 21 and her denial of the charges.
This ruling by the Delhi High Court adds to the ongoing inconsistency in Indian High Courts’ judgments regarding the use of Aadhaar cards as evidence for age determination. Some High Courts, like the Madhya Pradesh High Court, have previously ruled against considering Aadhaar cards as proof of age, while others, like the Kerala High Court, have made similar determinations. The debate surrounding the legal status of Aadhaar cards as documents for age verification continues, leaving room for further legal clarification and potential amendments to existing laws.
Name: Tanvi Bansal , Semester: 3rd , College: UILS, PU , As intern under Legal Vidhiya .
