The Employees Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) on Wednesday said Aadhaar is no longer acceptable as a document for proof of date of birth (DOB). In a January 16 circular, EPFO clarified that Aadhaar—which was considered as proof of date of birth—can be used as an identity document subject to authentication.
In December 2023, the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) issued a memorandum officially removing Aadhaar as a document for proof of DOB. This prompted EPFO’s January circular.
EPFO’s January 16 directive comes even as the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) through UIDAI – Aadhaar’s parent authority, had circulated an office memorandum as early as December 2018 stating that the unique biometric identification document was not to be used as proof of DOB.
However, the reason behind the five-year delay in finally removing Aadhaar from the list of acceptable documents for proof of DOB is unclear. The July 2023 Bombay High Court judgment—a possible prompt for the December 2023 circular—is not the first time high courts have ruled that Aadhaar is not proof of DOB.
Aadhaar not proof of DOB: Bombay High Court
In July 2023, the Bombay High Court ruled that Aadhaar was not proof of DOB. The High Court relied on UIDAI’s submission that “capturing of date of birth is entirely based on information submitted by the resident” and hence, the “burden of proving the date of birth of any person lies with the concerned resident”.
“Thus, it is evident from the affidavit…that the Aadhaar card is not a proof of the date of birth of a person, and that the burden of proof would lie with the Aadhaar card holder, who states his/her date of birth,” the high court noted.
The genesis of the case stems from the Maharashtra government’s 2022 appeal before the Bombay High Court seeking directions from UIDAI to disclose information on the authenticity of Sandeep alias Ghungro Lalji Kumar’s Aadhaar card.
The Maharashtra government filed this plea as part of its probe into a murder case.
In 2020, when Kumar was arrested for murder, he had submitted an Aadhaar card with the date of birth being January 1, 2001, which meant he was 21 years of age at the time. However, Kumar then filed a plea seeking to be treated as a juvenile and submitted an Aadhaar card with his DOB recorded as March 5, 2003, as proof. If the second Aadhaar card was to be taken on record as true, it would mean that Kumar was a juvenile at the time of the murder.
By seeking documentation that went behind the authentication, the Maharashtra government sought UIDAI’s help in ascertaining which Aadhaar card was true.
The sessions judge at the time had eventually ordered an ossification test – a bone test to determine a person’s age – to clear the confusion. The ossification test proved Kumar to be a juvenile and he was tried as one.
In fact, the Bombay High Court in July 2023 had even advised the police to file an additional case of impersonation against the accused.
The Bombay High Court’s July 2023 judgment is not the first of its kind. There have been many judgments from different high courts which have underscored the same point.
Aadhaar cannot be considered conclusive DOB proof
In January 2019, while deciding a related issue as to ‘of what facts Aadhaar Card is Proof?’, Jasmine, Deputy Director, UIDAI, Regional Office, Lucknow told Allahabad High Court that Aadhaar is only “a proof of the fact that the person who is trying to obtain a subsidy/service by identifying himself based on Aadhaar number is the same person who had enrolled for Aadhaar, after providing his biometrics and other documents at the time of enrolment. Aadhaar is only a method of identification of the identity that the Aadhaar holder presented himself at the time of his enrolment.”
2020, while hearing a divorce plea the Punjab and Haryana High Court had said Aadhaar could not be considered “conclusive proof of age” preferring to rely on a birth certificate or matriculate certificates.
The high court reiterated this point in September 2021 while hearing the plea of a runaway couple from Haryana’s Jind district. “There is no firm proof of age of either of the petitioners apart from their Aadhaar cards, which is actually no proof as no documentary proof is usually asked for at the time of applying for the Aadhaar card or thereof…,” the high court had said.
In November 2022, Kerala High Court said an Aadhaar card is not recognised as a document for proof of age by the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The high court said relying on the school certificate was enough if there was a discrepancy of ages in the school document and an Aadhaar card.
“...I am of the view that if there is a certificate from the school or the matriculation or equivalent certificate from the examination Board concerned that specifies the date of birth, the said document alone is acceptable as proof of age of the accused under section 94(2)(i) of the JJ Act, 2015, who claims to be a child in conflict with the law,” the high court said.
The high court said that in the absence of a school certificate, authorities could rely on a birth certificate given by municipal authority or panchayat, could be accepted as proof of age, or an ossification test as a last resort.
In April 2023, the Jabalpur Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court also held that Aadhaar Card is not proof to determine the age of a minor rape survivor.