The Karnataka High Court has made a pivotal ruling in a case involving the right to privacy in the context of matrimonial disputes, setting aside a previous order that directed the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) to disclose Aadhaar details. The case arose when a woman, engaged in a matrimonial dispute and unable to enforce a maintenance order due to her husband’s unknown whereabouts, sought his Aadhaar details under the Right to Information Act (RTI).
The division bench, comprising Justices S Sunil Dutt Yadav and Vijaykumar A Patil, overturned the decision of a single judge who had instructed the UIDAI to hold a hearing and decide whether to divulge the husband’s Aadhaar details to his wife. The bench emphasized that such a directive could only be issued by a High Court judge, as per Section 33(1) of the Aadhaar Act. The bench stated,
“Single Judge has grossly erred…such power of passing an order to divulge the information is conferred on a Court not inferior to that of a Judge of the High Court in terms of Section 33(1) of 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 case, initially brought before the court by the woman, P. Lavanya, sought her husband’s personal details to enforce a maintenance order. The UIDAI, challenging the single judge’s order, argued that the direction was in violation of the mandate under Section 33 of the Aadhaar Act. The amended Section 33, following the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment in K.S. Puttaswamy (Retired) and Another (Aadhaar) v. Union of India & Another [K.S.Puttaswamy] (2018), recognizes the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The respondent/wife contended that the information sought was regarding her husband and should not be restricted under the RTI Act, arguing that the marriage results in the merging of identities of both spouses. However, the court observed,
“Consideration of the case of the Aadhaar card holder is to be by a responsible Authority as stipulated under the Aadhaar Act, which lays emphasis on the importance of the right to privacy and the same cannot be diluted by delegating the same to an inferior Authority.”
The court accepted the wife’s undertaking to amend the proceedings to include her husband as a respondent before the single judge. The matter was then set aside and remitted back for fresh consideration.
This ruling underscores the delicate balance between the right to privacy and the need for disclosure in family law disputes. It reaffirms the primacy of an individual’s right to privacy, even within the context of a marital relationship, and sets a precedent for how personal information is to be handled in legal disputes.