Delhi HC stays Aadhaar attendance order for public prosecutors

The Delhi High Court has stayed a government order mandating Aadhaar-based attendance for public prosecutors. The petition argues the rule is arbitrary, intrusive and could hamper criminal court work.Image used for representational purposes onlyNewdelhi,Oct 9, 2026 14:08 ISTThe Delhi High Court on Friday stayed a Delhi government order that made it compulsory for public prosecutors in trial courts to mark their attendance every day through the Aadhaar Enabled Biometric Attendance System (AEBAS).Justice Amit Mahajan issued notice on a petition filed by the Delhi Prosecutors' Welfare Association against the October 5 order of the Delhi government's Directorate of Prosecution. The matter will now be heard in December.Under the directive, all prosecuting officers were required to mark daily attendance either on the biometric attendance machine or on their mobile phones through the attendance app at their respective district court complex or the office of the district in-charge.Appearing for the petitioner, senior advocates N Hariharan, Ashish Mohan and Sacchin Puri argued that public prosecutors and additional public prosecutors are officers of the court, appointed under Sections 18 and 19 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and that their presence is already recorded every day in judicial order sheets. They said the order making registration and attendance through AEBAS compulsory was unreasoned, arbitrary, and contrary to the law on Aadhaar and the right to privacy. Lawyers Kushal Kumar, Aditya Kapoor, Rishabh Saxena and Harsh Ahuja also appeared for the petitioner. The petition said, "The work of a prosecuting officer is court-centric. Courts commence at 10:00 A.M.; before that, the prosecuting officer confers with investigating officers, scrutinises police files, verifies the presence of witnesses and prepares remand and bail matters, and thereafter remains in court until it rises." It further said, "A rigid attendance regime not only imposes an unreasonable administrative burden upon chief public prosecutors to account for routine court-related movements, but also has the potential to divert prosecuting officers from their primary judicial functions and cause avoidable delays in remand, bail and trial proceedings, thereby adversely affecting the expeditious administration of criminal justice and the constitutional guarantee of speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India."The plea also said the authorities had earlier rejected the association's representation against AEBAS attendance, saying it lacked merit and that marking attendance was necessary. With the high court now staying the order and issuing notice, the challenge to the attendance rule will next be taken up in December. - Ends