Fake Aadhaar Used to Hide Real Age in Relationship Fraud — What the Law Says

One of my clients recently had a case which I am explaining below and if you are stuck in such similar situation, here is what to do.

Note: Due to attorney-client privilege, I cannot disclose complete case details or identify the actual parties involved. However, I am sharing the essential facts and legal approach so that if you find yourself in a similar situation, you can understand the available solutions and legal remedies.

Rohan Gupta, a software professional from Indore, had been in a committed relationship for nearly two years with a woman he met through a mutual friend in early 2023. She had met his family, visited his home in the Vijay Nagar locality, and repeatedly spoken about marriage. But something felt off by late 2024. After making discreet enquiries, Rohan discovered she had been simultaneously in another relationship throughout their time together.

He filed a complaint at the local police station in Indore. Shortly after, the woman filed a petition in the High Court to quash the complaint. When Rohan received a copy of that petition, the Aadhaar card attached to it showed a date of birth that was six years older than what she had told him. During their trips to Bhopal and Nagpur, she had sent him a photoshopped Aadhaar on WhatsApp for hotel check-ins and used it for train bookings as well. The QR code on the document she had sent him reflected entirely different birth details when scanned.

Rohan had initially approached a local general practitioner advocate who filed basic representations but could not advance the matter effectively. He then consulted Advocate Sudhir Rao, who identified that the photoshopped Aadhaar constituted a distinct set of offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita relating to forgery, cheating, and use of a forged document. A structured legal response was prepared, the quashing petition was contested with specific documentary evidence, and the case was placed on a stronger footing within a few months.

Advice in Such Cases

Consult with Lawyer: The very basic and important step to start is talk to Lawyer / advocate. You should not hesitate in paying his consultation fee i.e. might be in range of Rs. 10,000 to 50,000 depends case to case. He is helping you in this situation to come out. He is expert in the domain and can help you explain the procedure which you might have never explored. A good lawyer can get the issues resolved much faster than you think.

Preserve Digital Evidence Immediately: Don't delete any WhatsApp messages, shared images, or booking confirmations. Screenshot and back up the photoshopped Aadhaar, the QR code scan result, hotel check-in communications, and travel bookings. Digital evidence disappears easily and courts require authenticated copies.

Get the QR Code Discrepancy Certified: The mismatch between the visual Aadhaar details and the QR code scan data is a strong evidentiary point. Now, before you act, get a cybercrime expert or a UIDAI-authorised verification to produce a formal document showing the discrepancy. This is something many people overlook in early stages — and it costs them later.

Domain-Specific Experience Matters Here: Cases involving forged identity documents, cheating in a domestic relationship context, and simultaneous quashing petitions involve layered procedural and evidentiary strategies. Frankly, an advocate who regularly handles such matters is far better placed to counter a quashing petition effectively and to pursue the cybercrime angle alongside the cheating angle.

Applicable Sections of Law

• Section 318 BNS (Cheating): Covers dishonest inducement causing delivery of property or consent to an act through deception — directly applicable where a false identity was used to induce the complainant into a relationship.
• Section 336 BNS (Forgery): Making a false document or electronic record with intent to cause damage or injury — squarely covers the creation of a photoshopped Aadhaar.
• Section 340 BNS (Using a Forged Document as Genuine): Using a forged document knowing it to be forged is a distinct offence, even if the person did not themselves create the forgery.
• Section 66C and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000: Identity theft and cheating by personation using a computer resource — applicable given that the forged Aadhaar was transmitted digitally over WhatsApp.

Punishment and Penalties

• Section 318 BNS (Cheating): Imprisonment up to three years, or fine, or both. Cognizable, bailable, and compoundable with permission of the court.
• Section 336 BNS (Forgery): Imprisonment up to two years, or fine, or both. Cognizable and bailable.
• Section 340 BNS (Using Forged Document): Same punishment as for forgery — up to two years, or fine, or both.
• Section 66C IT Act: Imprisonment up to three years and fine up to Rs. 1,00,000. Cognizable and non-bailable.
• Where cheating causes serious harm or involves systematic deception, courts have taken a stricter view: see S. W. Palanitkar v. State of Bihar, AIR 2002 SC 1049, which clarified the essentials of cheating under the old IPC (principle equally applicable under BNS).

Jurisdiction — Where to File the Case

The FIR should be filed at the police station within whose territorial limits the cheating or the use of the forged document occurred. Since the photoshopped Aadhaar was sent digitally from or to a specific location, the cybercrime police station also has concurrent jurisdiction. In Bhura Ram v. State of Rajasthan, (2008) 11 SCC 103, the Supreme Court affirmed that a court within whose jurisdiction the offence was committed — even partially — has full jurisdiction. For the IT Act offences, the cybercrime cell of the city where the document was received on WhatsApp is a valid forum. The Chief Judicial Magistrate's court at the district level takes cognizance of these matters.

What if Police Refuse to File FIR?

Police sometimes hesitate in relationship-based cheating cases, treating them as civil disputes. Don't accept that characterisation. And here's why that matters: a forged Aadhaar used across multiple states for hotel check-ins and train bookings is not a civil dispute by any reasonable reading of the law. Here's what you can do:

• Submit a written complaint to the Superintendent of Police under Section 173(4) BNSS, demanding registration of the FIR.
• File a private complaint directly before the Magistrate under Section 175(3) BNSS, placing all documentary evidence on record.
• Approach the High Court under its writ jurisdiction if the police remain non-responsive even after the SP complaint.
• Cite Lalita Kumari v. Government of UP, (2014) 2 SCC 1, where the Supreme Court held that registration of FIR is mandatory when a cognizable offence is disclosed — police cannot exercise discretion to refuse.

Rights of the Accused

If you've been named as accused, or if the accused person in your case raises rights-based arguments, here is what the law provides:

• Right against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) of the Constitution — no person can be compelled to be a witness against themselves.
• Right to legal representation under Article 22 — the accused must be informed of this right upon arrest.
• Right to be produced before a Magistrate within 24 hours of arrest under Article 22(2) and Section 57 BNSS.
• Right to receive a copy of the FIR and to know the grounds of arrest under Section 47 BNSS.
• Right to have a relative or friend informed of the arrest promptly.

Bail Provisions

Forgery under Section 336 BNS and cheating under Section 318 BNS are bailable offences — bail can be obtained at the police station itself without approaching a court. The Section 66C IT Act offence, however, is non-bailable, requiring a court application. Anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS is available if the accused apprehends arrest. Regular bail after arrest is governed by Section 480 BNSS for bailable matters and Section 483 BNSS for non-bailable matters. And here's the thing: typical bail conditions in identity fraud cases include surrender of passport, periodic appearance before the investigating officer, and a direction not to tamper with digital evidence or contact witnesses.

Quashing of FIR / Case

The accused filed a quashing petition in this case. That's not unusual. High Courts have inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS to quash an FIR where no prima facie offence is made out, or where continuation of proceedings amounts to an abuse of process. Make no mistake: where a forged document has been transmitted and used, and where a QR code independently confirms the forgery, it's very difficult to establish that no cognizable offence is disclosed. In State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, the Supreme Court laid down the narrow grounds on which quashing is permissible. A well-prepared counter-affidavit with the QR scan evidence can substantially weaken a quashing petition in cases like this.

If You Are the Victim

• File a detailed written complaint at the police station immediately, attaching screenshots of all communications and the shared Aadhaar image.
• Request a formal QR code verification from UIDAI or through the official mAadhaar portal and obtain a printed or certified record of the scan result.
• Do not confront the other party or send any threatening messages — that can compromise your position as the complainant.
• Keep a chronological record of events: when you met, what was represented to you, family meetings, hotel stays, and booking records showing the forged document was used.
• Respond promptly and thoroughly to any quashing petition filed against your complaint — silence or delay in filing a counter-affidavit can be harmful.

Documents You Must Keep Ready

• Your own Aadhaar card and PAN card for complainant identification.
• Screenshot of the photoshopped Aadhaar sent to you on WhatsApp, saved with metadata intact.
• QR code scan result (screenshot from mAadhaar app or UIDAI portal) showing the actual date of birth.
• Hotel check-in records, booking confirmation emails or SMS, and travel tickets where the false Aadhaar was used.
• WhatsApp chat history (exported with media) between you and the accused.
• Photographs or evidence of family meetings and outings that establish the nature and duration of the relationship.
• Copy of the quashing petition filed by the accused, especially the Aadhaar attached to it showing the real date of birth.

What Evidence Is Required?

• Primary Digital Evidence: The original WhatsApp message containing the photoshopped Aadhaar, preserved on the device with hash value if possible.
• QR Code Discrepancy Report: A documented scan showing that the QR code data contradicts the visual content of the Aadhaar — this is the most direct evidence of forgery.
• Booking Records: Hotel, train, or bus booking confirmations where the false Aadhaar was submitted as identity proof.
• UIDAI Verification: Official clarification from UIDAI confirming the actual registered date of birth of the Aadhaar number in question.
• Witness Testimony: Family members or friends present during the relationship who heard the false representations about age or marriage.
• Forensic Report: A cyber forensic examination of the image file to confirm digital manipulation.

How the Police Behave in Such Cases

Relationship-based cheating cases. Police hate them. At most stations, the first instinct is to label it a personal dispute and send you home. The cybercrime angle — a digitally altered Aadhaar sent over WhatsApp — often isn't recognised at the local station level at all, and you'll need to push the matter to the cybercrime cell separately. Once the FIR is registered, investigation typically involves seizing devices, requesting UIDAI records, and examining digital metadata, but delays are common and persistent follow-up is the only thing that keeps it moving. Know your rights under Lalita Kumari v. Government of UP, (2014) 2 SCC 1 and don't hesitate to invoke them.

Timeline of Legal Process

• Filing of FIR / Complaint (Week 1-2): Submit complaint at police station or cybercrime cell; insist on written acknowledgment.
• Investigation (1-6 months): Police collect digital evidence, contact UIDAI, examine devices, record statements.
• Chargesheet (within 60-90 days of arrest under BNSS): Police file chargesheet before the Magistrate.
• Cognizance and Summons (1-3 months after chargesheet): Magistrate takes cognizance and issues summons/warrant to accused.
• Framing of Charges (3-6 months): Court frames charges after hearing both sides.
• Trial and Evidence (6 months to 2 years): Examination and cross-examination of witnesses, production of documents.
• Arguments and Judgment (1-3 months after evidence closes): Final arguments followed by judgment.
• Appeal, if any: Sessions Court or High Court; adds 1-3 years typically.

How Long Will

Advocate Sudhir Rao, Supreme Court of India

Facing a similar matter? Speak to a criminal advocate in Delhi — Advocate Sudhir Rao appears in bail, trial and appellate matters before the Delhi District Courts, the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court of India.