Appellant: Denial of information u/s 8(1)(h) is rather bizarre as the case pertains to a period dating back 22 years - CIC: PIO mechanically invoked the exemption on the premise that de novo inquiries are pending against the Appellant; Inspection allowed
14 Feb, 2019Information sought:
Appellant sought inspection of file no.98/FNC/013; of the file where his representation dated nil received in CVC on 04.09.2017 and representation dated 10.07.2017 was examined; time limit for filing status report by CVO.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The CPIO has not provided the desired information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present in person.
Respondent: Rakesh Desai, Director & CPIO, CVC, New Delhi present in person.
Appellant stated that at this stage he is limiting the relief sought to only para 1 of the RTI Application wherein he has sought inspection of file no.098/FNC/019. He further stated that denial of information under Section 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; of RTI Act is rather bizarre as the case pertains to a period dating back 22 The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923), and any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act. years and this particular file deals with the inquiry against him in which he has even been provided with punishment in the year 2003. He furthermore stated that he is aggrieved with the complete ignorance of the CPIO regarding the precedents laid down by the Commission over the recent years with respect to the application of Section 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; of RTI Act that it has to be justified as to how disclosure of information will impede the process of investigation and he exclaimed that the information sought on para 1 of RTI Application pertains to an investigation which has been long since concluded. He requested for imposition of penalty on the CPIO for denying the information and adding to the harassment caused to him by the department for all these years.
CPIO agreed to the contention of the Appellant that the inquiry which the Appellant has referred to has been completed in 2003 but insisted that subsequent to that a de novo inquiry was again ordered which is still under process therefore the information was denied under Section 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; of RTI Act. Appellant argued that de novo inquiry has been going on for ages but all he is requesting for is the inspection of file sought at para 1 of the RTI Application which is concerned with the inquiry which has been concluded to which the CPIO has also agreed.
Keeping in view the limited relief sought by the Appellant, Commission remarked that since the moot question is the disclosure of file sought at para 1 of the RTI Application which is concerned with an inquiry concluded long ago, there should not be any reservations in providing this information. At this point, CPIO desired to introduce the exemption of Section 8(1)(g) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; of RTI Act for blacking out names of officers in the concerned file by claiming that disclosure of the same may endanger the life and physical safety of these officers.
Decision
Commission observes from the proceedings of the hearing that the CPIO did not perhaps comprehend the RTI Application carefully. In other words, the fact that the file with respect to which information has been sought on para 1 of the RTI Application did not concern any pending inquiry by CPIO’s own admission was ignored at the time of replying on the RTI Application. CPIO mechanically invoked the exemption of Section 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; of RTI Act on the premise that de novo inquiries are pending against the Appellant, even so, he was required to ascertain if the particular file references mentioned in the RTI Application pertain to any pending inquiry. By its very implication, a de novo inquiry is a fresh inquiry so it is not understood how disclosure of information pertaining to an earlier concluded inquiry will affect de novo inquiry proceedings unless CPIO could satisfy the bench in this regard.
CPIO clearly failed to justify the denial of information under Section 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; of RTI Act on para 1 of the RTI Application and at the hearing stage introducing the exemption of Section 8(1)(g) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; of RTI Act appears rather labored and without any merit. In view of the foregoing, Commission directs the CPIO to provide an adequate opportunity of inspection as sought by the Appellant on para 1 of the RTI Application of File No.98/FNC/013 whereby letter no.98/FNC/013/353790 was issued. The said inspection shall be provided on a mutually decided date and time intimated to the Appellant telephonically and in writing by the CPIO and copy of documents identified upon inspection will be provided free of cost. Commission’s directions should be complied within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order. A compliance report to this effect shall be duly sent to the Commission by the CPIO.
As regards, Appellant’s request for imposition of penalty, based on the strength of material on record as well as proceedings during hearing, Commission does not find any malafide intention to be ascribed to the conduct of the CPIO in having mindlessly denied the information sought at para 1 of the RTI Application. Hence, no action is warranted under Section 20 of the RTI Act in the matter.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Divya Prakash Sinha
Information Commissioner
Citation: Dilip Kumar v. CPIO, Central Vigilance Commission in File No: CIC/CVCOM/A/2018/103058/SD, Date of Decision: 06/02/2019