“An Aadhaar Card is not per se proof of date of birth:” Supreme Court

On October 24, 2024 (Thursday), the Supreme Court (SC) bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan set aside a High Court’s decision accepting the date of birth mentioned in the Aadhaar Card to determine the victim’s age in a motor accident compensation case. The SC bench said that the date of birth of the deceased had to be determined from the one mentioned in the School Leaving Certificate under sub-section (2) of Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Sub-section (2) of Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act states that “In case, the Committee or the Board has reasonable grounds for doubt regarding whether the person brought before it is a child or not, the Committee or the Board, as the case may be, shall undertake the process of age determination, by seeking evidence by obtaining —

• the date of birth certificate from the school, or the matriculation or equivalent certificate from the concerned examination Board, if available; and in the absence thereof;
• the birth certificate given by a corporation or a municipal authority or a panchayat;
• and only in the absence of (i) and (ii) above, age shall be determined by an ossification test or any other latest medical age determination test conducted on the orders of the Committee or the Board…”

The bench noted, “We find that the Unique Identification Authority of India, by way of its circular number 8 of 2023, has stated, in reference to an office memorandum issued by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology dated December 20, 2018, that an Aadhaar Card, while can be used to establish identity, is not per se proof of date of birth.” 

In this case, the compensation of Rs. 19,35,400/- decided by the MACT (Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal) was reduced to Rs. 9,22,336/- by the High Court after noting that “minimum wage rates issued by the Government are uniformly applicable throughout the State and, therefore, constitute a better measure for calculating the notional income of a deceased person, as opposed to special DC rates notified by the Deputy Commissioner of a District, and, therefore, would only be applicable to that particular district. Further, it was observed that with respect to the age at the time of death, the Aadhar Card of the deceased records his date of birth to be 1st January 1969; thus, the age comes to 47 years. Hence, the multiplier applicable would be 13.” 

Aggrieved by the same, the claimant-appellants approached the SC. It contended that “The multiplier applicable would be 14 since, in the School Leave Certificate the date of birth of the deceased is shown as 7th October, 1970. His age, then at the time of the accident was 45 years. They were further aggrieved by the calculation of monthly income to be Rs. 5,886/-” During the proceedings, the questions addressed by the SC are, “(a) in case of conflict of the dates of birth between the two documents, as in this case between the School Leaving Certificate and the Aadhar Card, which of the two is to be taken as authoritative; and (b) whether in the facts of the case, the High Court’s reduction of the compensation awarded by the learned MACT, was justified and in accordance with law?” 

After considering decisions of existing cases, the SC bench said, “...we have no hesitation in accepting the contention of the claimant-appellants, based on the School Leaving Certificate. Thus, we find no error in the learned MACT’s determination of age based on the School Leaving Certificate.” Lastly, the SC ordered, “The appeals are allowed, the total amount, i.e., Rs.14,41,500, in the interest of just compensation is rounded off to Rs.15,00,000/- with 8% interest from the date of filing of the claim petition to be released to the rightful claimants in the manner directed by the Tribunal.”