SAJID HUSSAIN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned amicus curiae, Mr. Indrajit Sinha has placed different statutes enacted by the Parliament as well as by the State Legislator on the question of the recognition of identity of an individual/Indian National. The Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 provides for creation of an unique identification code of an individual commonly known as Aadhaar number. The Unique Identification Authority of India is a statutory Authority created under the Act. However, it functions under the Parent Department of Information and Technology, Government of India. Under the Income Tax Act and the rules framed there under, the PAN (Permanent Account Number) Card are accepted as identity of an individual assessee. The parent ministry being the Ministry of Finance. The Passport Act, 1967 and the rules made there under provides the basis for declaration of identity of an Indian Citizen. These functions are performed under the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India.

(2.) Learned amicus curiae also refers to the Office Memorandum of Ministry of Home dated 13.1987, which lays down the procedure in the matters relating to addition/deletion/change of name/surname. The Office Memorandum however does not refer to any statute. It appears to be an administrative instruction or circular. He has also placed the provisions of the Registration of Birth and Death Act, 1969, which is a parliamentary legislation. This in itself requires mandatory registration of birth and death of an individual. The State legislation on the subject, for example is Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011, which provides for compulsory registration of birth and death. Learned amicus curiae also refers to the legislation framed by the State of Goa namely "The Goa Change of Name and Surname Act, 1990" and the Rules of 1991 framed there under. Reference is also made to the Citizenship Act, 1955 framed by the Parliament where under the Citizenship (Registration of Citizen and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules 2003 have also been framed. Census has also a seminal role in the matter of recognition of identity of an individual/Indian National.

(3.) There might be many State legislations in relation to the recognition of the identity of the Individual/Indian National or for change of identity/name for that matter. Learned amicus curiae submits that the aforesaid factual and legal position in law shows that there is no uniform codified law in India which governs the procedure for change of name. A person may change his name for various reasons. In a given case there may be no machinery to verify the genuineness of such reason. Though generally speaking no mens rea or bad motive can be attributed to a person for changing his/her name but there can be a situation where a person seeks to change his/her name in order to escape from legal liabilities, either civil or criminal or both. Such change in identity/name can lead to serious consequence. Different Authorities follow different procedures permitting a person to change his name in the documents relating to person's identification. This also leads to an anomalous situation where a person has to undertake various steps for changing name in various documents. It also present a situation where a bona fide person seeking change in his name may have to face the rigmarole of complicated procedure. Learned amicus curiae therefore submits that the issue in question has a very large and serious repercussion. The State and its Instrumentalities cannot escape from creating a legal framework in which the identity/name of an individual is susceptible to change under a set of common denominators. This country faces large scale illegal immigration from its porous borders. It also leads to fake identity giving rise to acts of terrorism, extremism, which the country is increasingly facing day by day. The welfare measures and schemes of the Central and State Government are often liable to be usurped by elements with fake identities. The situation is grave enough to call for a concerted effort by all the stake holders. In the absence of uniform codified law and procedure, the Court can fill the vacuum by laying down guidelines till the Legislature steps in. The Law Commission of India and the Legislature can also be requested to examine the matter.