DigiLocker Issued Documents and Uploaded Files
Distinguish issued DigiLocker documents from files a user uploads. Build an evidence policy for the source, verification method, and review outcomes you need.
Check how a document reached DigiLocker before you use it as evidence. Issued documents come from an issuer's records through the platform. Uploaded files are copies a user adds to their account. DigiLocker FAQ
A preview screen can make both look like a PDF. Your application needs to preserve the distinction when it receives, displays, or reviews a document.
Decide what evidence the workflow needs
| Evidence | What to record | Example use |
|---|---|---|
| Issued record from an approved source | Source, issuer, document type, and check time | Review an issued academic award |
| User-uploaded copy | Submission source and reviewer status | Provide material for a manual review |
| Independently verified signature | Verification method and trust source | Apply a policy that requires a validated signature |
| Missing issued record | Lookup outcome and approved next step | Ask the person to use an alternative |
These are application policy examples. Confirm the documents and checks your workflow accepts. An issuer signature can require a separate verification step even when the download source is known.
Handle two files with the same label
Consider a synthetic admissions workflow. A candidate has an issued transcript and an uploaded scan named “Transcript.” The application has permission to receive the issued record for the current purpose.
Store the chosen record's source as structured metadata. A support agent should see which item was received. The visible filename provides a label for the person, so keep it separate from the source classification.
If the issued record is unavailable, open a distinct manual review case. Preserve the uploaded copy's status through any later decision. Avoid converting the manual result into an issued-record outcome.
Keep review decisions attached to the evidence
Record the request, selected source, and check time. Add the reviewer and policy version when a manual decision is necessary. Limit access to the people who need the evidence for that purpose.
If the user submits a corrected document, link it to a new observation. The earlier record should retain its original decision and timestamp. This lets your team understand why a case changed.
Run a source distinction test
- Prepare one synthetic issued record.
- Prepare one synthetic uploaded copy with the same visible name.
- Check the application labels for each source.
- Try to use the uploaded copy in an issued-only workflow.
- Confirm the case follows the configured review path.
Use the same distinction in notifications and exports. A report that collapses these outcomes into “verified document” loses the reason for the decision. Download integrity and issuer signatures.
Review your evidence policy with NamoID
NamoID engineers can help you define source labels and map result fields to your application policy. Share your required document and a synthetic review case in Slack. Message the NamoID team in Slack