To
Civil and Criminal Courts
Opp. Municpal Office,
Vasco, Goa
Tel: + 91 - 832-2512085
Subject-Request for Judicial Magistrate's order asking UIDAI to handover biometric data to CBI
Sir/Madam,
This is to request you for a copy of the order of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Vasco da Gama dated 22nd October, 2013. This specific order in favour of CBI was challenged by Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) in the High Court of Bombay at Panaji as Criminal Writ Petition No.10/2014. The High Court gave its judgement on February 26, 2014. Following which a Special Leave to Appeal (Crl)
No(s). 2524/2014 was filed and mentioned on March 14, 2014 before the Chief Justice bench in the Supreme Court. It is listed for hearing in the Supreme Court on March 24, 2014.
The order of High Court of Bombay at Panaji February 26, 2014 in Criminal Writ Petition No.10/2014 observes, "3. The petitioner who is Unique Identification Authority of India itself has sought to challenge the order of the learned Magistrate dated 22.10.2013 passed for providing certain data to the CBI upon an application of the CBI under Section 91 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
4. The application shows the purpose of obtaining the necessary data;in respect of investigation in the case of a rape of seven years old child who was the school student and in which case the incident transpired in a school toilet by an unknown person during the recess time on a given date.
5. The CBI has certain chance fingerprints obtained from the place of the incident. It was the case of the CBI that thumb impression available with the petitioner could be compared with the chance fingerprints obtained by the CBI to trace the accused.
6. The investigation is yet in progress. The accused is not traced. The petitioner has refused to co-operate. The petitioner has challenged the order of the learned Magistrate for providing the necessary data for further investigation.
7. The petitioner has taken up the legal contention of privacy, not of itself, but of the various applicants and other card holders, if such information is to be provided. It is argued on behalf of the petitioner that the impugned order is cryptic and without any reason and hence it is required to be set aside."
We need to understand the context, therefore, kindly share the order of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Vasco da Gama dated 22nd October, 2013 at the earliest.
Yours faithfully
Gopal Krishna
Citizens Forum for Civil Liberties (CFCL)
Mb: 08227816731, 09818089660
E-mail:gopalkrishna1715@gmail.
Civil and Criminal Courts
Opp. Municpal Office,
Vasco, Goa
Tel: + 91 - 832-2512085
Subject-Request for Judicial Magistrate's order asking UIDAI to handover biometric data to CBI
Sir/Madam,
This is to request you for a copy of the order of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Vasco da Gama dated 22nd October, 2013. This specific order in favour of CBI was challenged by Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) in the High Court of Bombay at Panaji as Criminal Writ Petition No.10/2014. The High Court gave its judgement on February 26, 2014. Following which a Special Leave to Appeal (Crl)
No(s). 2524/2014 was filed and mentioned on March 14, 2014 before the Chief Justice bench in the Supreme Court. It is listed for hearing in the Supreme Court on March 24, 2014.
The order of High Court of Bombay at Panaji February 26, 2014 in Criminal Writ Petition No.10/2014 observes, "3. The petitioner who is Unique Identification Authority of India itself has sought to challenge the order of the learned Magistrate dated 22.10.2013 passed for providing certain data to the CBI upon an application of the CBI under Section 91 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
4. The application shows the purpose of obtaining the necessary data;in respect of investigation in the case of a rape of seven years old child who was the school student and in which case the incident transpired in a school toilet by an unknown person during the recess time on a given date.
5. The CBI has certain chance fingerprints obtained from the place of the incident. It was the case of the CBI that thumb impression available with the petitioner could be compared with the chance fingerprints obtained by the CBI to trace the accused.
6. The investigation is yet in progress. The accused is not traced. The petitioner has refused to co-operate. The petitioner has challenged the order of the learned Magistrate for providing the necessary data for further investigation.
7. The petitioner has taken up the legal contention of privacy, not of itself, but of the various applicants and other card holders, if such information is to be provided. It is argued on behalf of the petitioner that the impugned order is cryptic and without any reason and hence it is required to be set aside."
We need to understand the context, therefore, kindly share the order of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Vasco da Gama dated 22nd October, 2013 at the earliest.
Yours faithfully
Gopal Krishna
Citizens Forum for Civil Liberties (CFCL)
Mb: 08227816731, 09818089660
E-mail:gopalkrishna1715@gmail.
No comments:
Post a Comment