11. Addressing the first pivotal legal question concerns the applicability of the Aadhaar Act, 2016, to an act committed before its enactment, is deeply embedded in constitutional guarantees, dictates that penal statutes operate prospectively, as is encapsulated in the Latin maxim lex prospicit non respicit (the law looks forward, not backward), which serves as a paramount safeguard against arbitrary criminalization. The constitution enshrined these fundamental principles in Article 20(1) of the Constitution of India, which dictates that "no person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence." This constitutional safeguard prohibits ex post facto laws, ensuring that an individual is prosecuted only for actions that constituted an offense at the time of their commission. The alleged act of fraudulent fingerprint usage in this case unequivocally occurred on February 16, 2014. Conversely, the penal provisions of the Aadhaar Act, 2016, specifically Sections 34, 35, and 42, upon which the prosecution relies, came into effect only on September 12, 2016. Upon a thorough examination of the Aadhaar Act, 2016, I found no express provision within its text stipulating its retrospective application. In the absence of such an explicit legislative mandate, criminalizing an act that was not an offense under the specific
