CIC: Instead of focussing on his actual query about the alleged fictitious complainants, the Appellant has complicated his questionnaire with too many diverse queries - CIC advised the Appellant to approach the Respondent to seek responses for his queries
23 Aug, 2018CIC: Appellant has not employed the appropriate method for obtaining the information - CIC: Instead of focussing on his actual query about the alleged fictitious complainants, the Appellant has complicated his questionnaire with too many diverse queries CIC advised the Appellant to approach the Respondent - ACP K S N Subudhi on a mutually convenient date and time and seek responses against his queries
Information sought and background of the case:
CIC/DEPOL/A/2017/114146
Vide RTI application dated 25-10-2016, appellant sought information as follows:-
1. Please provide me the copies of case no. under which B.M Singhal, Mr. Verrpal, Mr Oakil Mukhiya, Mr. Suresh and Mr. R. Dayal filed complaints against appellant in the Hon’ble Court of ADDL M.M (Not Mr) Mandam Ravindra Bedi.
2. Copies of order where Hon’ble Addl M.M shifted the case from her court to mediation against parties i.e., B.M Singhal, Mr. Verrpal, Mr Oakil Mukhiya, Mr. Suresh and Mr. R.Dayal and appellant.
3. Copies of the judgement where the matter was decided in the mediation and shifted to the court of Hon’ble Paramjeet Singh (ADJ-02/West) Tis Hazari to pronounce the judgement to pay 1,37,000/- to Mr HR Chugh. There after the complainant Mr. H.R Chugh gave undertaking that he would not file any complaint against abovementioned persons.
CPIO vide letter dated 23-11-2016 requested to appellant to inspect the file but appellant was not satisfied on being asked to inspect the file instead of furnishing the information, hence he filed first appeal. FAA/Dy. Commissioner vide letter dated 20.12.2016 informed that information provided by PIO/West was found to be correct as per record and no more relief in this matter can be given to the appellant. Feeling aggrieved with response of CPIO and FAA, the appellant approached the Commission.
CIC/DEPOL/A/2018/112849
Vide RTI Application dated 09-09-2017, appellant sought information regarding the complaint application as under
1. Please provide photo copies of all the documents forward by the office of PIO Outer Distt including appellant RTI and its enclosure to West Distt for information to appellant.
2. The enquiry of complaint application is complete?
3. The same is uploaded in PGPORTAL against ID no. PMOPG/D/2016/0259136 and copy of the same to appellant as per the direction of the office of Hon’ble prime minister.
4. The PGPORTAL IDno PMOPG/D/2016/0259136 was transfer to Outer District by whom i.e., West Distt/Police Commissioner of Delhi or by office of the Prime Minister and again the same is transfer back West Distt.
5. If it is completed the date of completion.
6. The name of IO and ACP dealing with the complaint.
CPIO vide letter dated 28-09-2017, replied as under:-
1, 3, 4, and 5 - In this regard it is stated that your complaint was received from DCP/Outer Distt. vide no. 1570/Complts/AC-III/Outer Distt dated 06-07-2017 and diarized vide dy. No. 16064/C/W dated 12-07-2017. On the basis of enquiry report of ACP/Rajouri Garden the same has been filed. Copy of enquiry of said complaint alongwith relevant documents, so furnished by I/C compliant branch, are enclosed herewith which are self contained. Moreover your complaint was received from PMOPG vide his office no. PMOPG/D/2016/0259136 bearing this office dispatch no. 8766/C/W dt 19-07-17. On the basis of enquiry report of ACP /Rajouri Garden the same has been filed. Copy of enquiry report of both the complaints are same and has already been provided.
2. Yes
6. Investigation Officer SI Laxman of PS Janak Puri and ACP/Rajouri Garden Sh. K.S.N Subudhi. Being dissatisfied with the reply of CPIO, the appellant filed first appeal dated 27-10-2017. FAA vide order dated 22-11-2017 directed the PIO/west to provide a fresh report in this matter and point wise information to the appellant.
In compliance of FAO, PIO/West vide letter dated 01-12-17 replied as under:-
1. In this regard it is stated that your complaint was received from DCP/Outer distt. Vide no. 1570/complts/AC-III/outer distt dated 06-07-2017 and diarized vide dy. No. 16064/C/W dated 12-07-2017. On the basis of enquiry report of ACP/Rajouri Garden The same has been filed. Copy of enquiry of said complaint alongwith relevant documents, so furnished by I/C compliant branch, are enclosed herewith which are self contained. Moreover your complaint was received from PMOPG vide his office no. PMOPG/D/2016/0259136 bearing this office dispatch no. 8766/C/W dt 19-07-17. On the basis of enquiry report of ACP /Rajouri Garden the same has been filed. Copy of enquiry report of both the complaints are same and has already been provided.
2. Yes. 3. As mentioned in point no.1 above.
4. From west district.
5. 01-08-2017.
6. Investigation Officer SI Laxman of PS Janak Puri and ACP/Rajouri Garden sh. K.S.N Subudhi. Still aggrieved, the appellant approached the Commission.
CIC/DEPOL/A/2017/124953
Vide RTI application dated 18-11-2016, appellant sought information regarding the guide lines of police department under which I.O can mislead by concealing the documents from hon’ble commission/appellant; Documents from which IO retrieved the address of Sh B.M. Singhal R/O 832/27 West Ram Nagar Sonepat; Full order of Hon’ble ADJ Shri Paramjeet Singh; Document which is self attested by complainant i.e., by Suresh, Copy of rent agreement between BM Singhal and Rameshawer Dayal Sharma for shop no. G3 ground floor, status of grievance registered as PMOPG/D/2016/0259136. CPIO vide letter dated 29-11-2016, replied as follows
1. There is no such guidelines have been framed and I.O has not concealed any document before the hon’ble commission.
2. The information sought by the appellant is extravagant as there is no address is mentioned by concerned department on the Pan card. However, copy of the statement in which sh. BM Singhal has mentioned his address with phone number.
3. In this regard it is stated that you may approach the concerned hon’ble court for the same, further you may clarify the rest of the information at your own.
4. As per record of PS Janak Puri, there is no document available which is self attested by Mr. Suresh kumar.
5. & 6. Seeking query is not concerned to this office and you may seek the information from concerned at your end.
6. As per record of complaint branch west distt. Without reference no. and date vide which said complaint was sent to this office, we are unable to trace the said complaint. Being dissatisfied with the reply of CPIO, the appellant filed first appeal on 15-12-2016. FAA/Dy. Commissioner of Police vide letter dated 19-1-2017 states that information provided by PIO/West was found to be correct as per record and no more relief in this matter can be given to the appellant.
Feeling aggrieved with the reply of CPIO and FAA, the appellant approached the commission.
Facts emerging in the course of hearing
Both parties appeared for the hearing. Appellant narrated that false complaints have been filed against him alleging him to be a blackmailer and extortionist by fictitious complainants. Hence he sought to check the veracity of the complaints and had filed the RTI applications with the intent of knowing the real identity of the complainants. However, he is dissatisfied with the reply received from the Respondents so far.
The Respondent, ACP- Sh. K S N Subudhi present during the hearing states that when he came to know about the case in hand, in order to address the focal contention of the appellant, he tried contacting the appellant over telephone. However, his attempt to contact the Appellant was met with resistance and the appellant instead of co operating and stating his problem, instead, refrained from providing any useful information for the respondent to help him and misbehaved with the ACP.
Decision
After hearing the contentions of both the parties and perusal of records, it appears that the Appellant has not employed the appropriate method for obtaining the information. Instead of focussing on his actual query about the alleged fictitious complainants, the Appellant has complicated his questionnaire with too many diverse queries. Records further reveal that Respondent has responded with available and reasonable responses/information against the queries raised by the appellant. Sh. K S N Subudhi has even volunteered to satisfy the queries of the appellant, provided the appellant is willing.
The appellant states that all three of the aforementioned appeals deal with the similar queries and issues. He further agreed to visit the Respondent to seek redressal of his queries. Accordingly, the Commission advises the Appellant to approach the Respondent – ACP K S N Subudhi on a mutually convenient date and time and seek responses against his queries.
The Respondent shall submit an Action Taken Report upon completion of the aforementioned exercise.
(Yashovardhan Azad)
Information Commissioner
Citation: Hans Raj Chug v. Delhi Police and Tis Hazari Courts in CIC/DEPOL/A/2017/114146 CIC/DEPOL/A/2018/112849 CIC/DEPOL/A/2017/124953, Date of Decision : 04.07.2018