Page No.# 1/6 GAHC030003792025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./17/2025 State of Mizoram and Anr. R/b Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram Home Department 2: Superintendent of Polic VERSUS Sh. Anthony Pauchinkhup @Paacii and Anr. S/o Khaizachin R/o Tiddim, Myanmar Present Address New Champhai, Mizoram 2:Deputy Directo Advocate for the Petitioner : Mrs. Linda L. Fambawl, P.P., Mizoram Advocate for the Respondent : Mr C Lalfakzuala for R1 Page No.# 2/6 B E F O R E HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MARLI VANKUNG ORDER 06.02.2026 Heard Mrs. Linda L. Fambawl, learned Public Prosecutor for the State of Mizoram. Also heard Mr. C. Lalfakzuala, learned counsel for respondent No. 1, and Mr. S.K. Medhi, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. This is an application filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, seeking to invoke the inherent powers of this court r/w Section 33(1) of the Adhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016, for obtaining the original documents submitted by the present respondent No. 1 for the generation of Adhaar Card No. 346077088186. 3. Mrs. Linda L. Fambawl, learned Public Prosecutor submits that during the course of investigation into Sairang Police Case No. 22/2024 dated 19.06.2024, registered under Section 25(IB)(a) of Arms Act read with Section 120(B) of Indian Penal Code, the petitioner found reasonable grounds to believe that respondent No. 1 is an illegal immigrant from Tiddim, Myanmar. However, it was discovered that respondent No. 1 possessed an Adhaar Card and a Pan Card as an Indian citizen. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that therefore, it is necessary for the petitioner to obtain the documents submitted by respondent Page No.# 3/6 No. 1 during the Adhaar enrolment process to verify if he was illegally issued documents as an Indian citizen. The instant Criminal Petition is filed to obtain an order for the disclosure of information as mandated under Section 33(1) read with Section 28 of the of the Adhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsides, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016. 4. Mr. C. Lalfakzuala, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 submits that the respondent is innocent of the allegations against him by registering Sairang Police Case No. 50/2024 dated 08.10.2024, under Section 336/340(2)/337 of the BNS, 2023. He further submitted that the respondent came to Mizoram as a refugee due to the political turmoil and civil unrest in Myanmar. As an Adhaar Card was required to open a bank account within the State of Mizoram, the respondent took the necessary steps to obtain an Adhaar Card. The learned counsel denies that the respondent No. 1 committed forgery by further submitting that one person named Robert facilitated the process and that respondent No. 1 was not involved in any criminal offence. 5. Mr. S.K.Medhi, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 submits that Adhaar Card No. 346077088186 was generated based on demographic and biometric information and is digitally signed by the UIDAI. This can be verified via a secure QR CODE containing a Reference Id, Name, Gender, DoB, Mobile, E-Mail, Page No.# 4/6 Address, Photograph and 2048-bit digital signature. The Adhaar QR CODE is available on Adhaar Letter, e-Adhaar and m-Adhaar, which can be read through mobile apps. He further submits that pursuant to Section 33(1) of the Adhaar Act, 2016, the information sought can only be provided by the UIDAI if this court passes an order for disclosure. 6. The learned counsel for respondent No. 2 further submits that an Adhaar number is used solely to establish identity. As per Section 9 of the Adhaar Act, 2016, an Adhaar number does not constitute evidence of citizenship or domicile, etc. 7. This court has considered the submissions made by the learned counsels for both the parties. Section 33(1) of the Adhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 is reproduced herein below: “Nothing contained in sub-section (2) or sub-section (5) of section 28 or sub-section (2) of section 29 shall apply in respect of any disclosure of information, incliding identity information or authentication records, made pursuant to an order of a court not inferior to that of a [Judge of High Court]: Provided that no order by the court under this sub-section shall be made Page No.# 5/6 without giving an opportunity of hearing to the Authority and the concerned Adhaar number holder: Provided further that the core biometric information shall not be disclosed under this sub-section.” 8. Further, Regulation 3(4) of the Adhaar (Sharing of Information) Regulations, 2016, states as under: “The Authority may share demographic information and photograph, and the authentication records of an Adhaar number holder when required to do so in accordance with Section 33 of the Act”. 9. It is also seen that the application made under Section 33(1) of the Adhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016, is required to obtain the various information submitted by respondent No. 1 while obtaining the Adhaar Card under his name, to enable the proper verification whether the respondent No. 1 had possessed the Adhaar Card wrongly as an Indian citizen. 10. In view of the above, this court finds it appropriate to invoke its inherent powers under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 r/w Section 33(1) of the Adhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, Page No.# 6/6 2016, and grant permission to the petitioners to obtain the necessary documents as permitted within Section 33 of the Adhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016, and for the respondents to disclose such information to enable the petitioner to proceed with the investigation of the case. 11. Accordingly, Crl.Pet. No. 17/2025 thus stands allowed and disposed of as above. JUDGE Comparing Assistant