High-sensitivity handling
Purpose limitation and minimal disclosure are central.
Review Police Clearance Certificate document signals, issuer/date consistency, and consent evidence without claiming direct police-source access or criminal-history conclusions.
Purpose limitation and minimal disclosure are central.
Focuses on PCC document evidence and consistency.
Does not claim direct police-source verification unless configured.
Choose PCC, state the reason for verification, and invite the subject or enter fixture data in sandbox.
The data principal sees the requester, purpose, and check type before any live verification starts.
PRAMAAN evaluates document signals and match evidence while keeping sensitive values minimized.
Teams receive a masked, timestamped result with consent reference, signals, and review guidance.
PCC verification must be handled carefully because it can influence background-related decisions.
Extracts the visible PCC or certificate reference where present.
Surfaces issuer, jurisdiction, or authority text for review.
Compares candidate identity fields with submitted profile context.
Flags old, expired, or unclear certificate timing.
Looks for document consistency, formatting, and tamper indicators.
Issuer mismatch, old certificate, or unclear language should be reviewed by a person.
PCC documents can affect access, employment, and deployment decisions. Reports should stay limited to what the certificate supports.
High-sensitivity background workflow
Minimal disclosure
Manual review for ambiguous cases
Support background-document review for relevant roles.
Organize certificate evidence for cross-border employment contexts.
Route certificate signals through careful review.
Use explicit consent and minimal disclosure for home-access roles.
Attach certificate evidence to site-access files.
Review PCC timing and issuer consistency before deployment.
PCC workflows should require explicit consent, purpose limitation, minimal disclosure, audit trails, and manual review where needed.
Every preview uses dummy sandbox data, a consent reference, a timestamp, document-specific signals, and bounded report language.
Sample sandbox report — no real PII
Sample sandbox report — no real PII. PCC verification provides certificate signals and does not claim direct police-source clearance.
Old certificates may not reflect current context and should be reviewed.
Unexpected authority, jurisdiction, or formatting needs manual review.
Edited or inconsistent certificate imagery should not be auto-approved.
Use PCC verification as a high-sensitivity document workflow with manual-review guidance.
Single live verification
₹99
Integrate certificate-signal review into HR, facility, contractor, and background-document queues.
Household help, driver, tutor — the default identity rail in India.
Tenant, vendor, employee — anyone receiving payment in India.
Most senior hires, mid-management vendors, NRIs returning.
Drivers, delivery workers, fleet operators — DL is the implicit job-credential.
Mid-to-senior hires, tutors, professional services contractors.
Tenant verification, household help address proof, vendor verification.
No. Live checks require explicit consent from the data principal before processing begins.
Yes. The sandbox demo uses fixture data only and does not require real PII.
PRAMAAN surfaces the mismatch as a verification signal and recommends manual review where the evidence is incomplete, stale, or inconsistent.
No. Reports provide verification signals and consent evidence for reviewer decision support. They should not be treated as a guaranteed legal outcome.
No. This page frames PCC verification as document and certificate-signal review unless a direct-source workflow is explicitly configured.
No. PRAMAAN should only surface what the certificate and configured workflow support, with manual review for sensitive decisions.
Use sandbox fixture data first, then run a live ₹99 verification when the requester, purpose, and consent path are ready.