Central Information Commission
Appeal No.CIC/WB/A/2008/00713-SM dated 20-12-2007
Right to Information Act-2005-Under Section (19)
Dated: 30 October 2009
Name of the Appellant : Shri Hari Singh
Jhuggi No. C-129,Sanjay Camp Chanakya
Puri, Chandragupt Marg,
New Delhi - 110 021.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, O/o the Deputy Commissioner of
Police, New Delhi District,
New Delhi.
The Appellant was present in person.
On behalf of the Respondent the following were present:-
(i) Shri Ved Prakash, ACP/NDD,
(ii) Smt. Usha Chopra, W/SI/NDD
The case was heard on 7 October 2009.
2. In this case, the Appellant had, in his application dated December 20,
2007, requested the CPIO for the details of the action taken on his various
complaints and representations in respect of the injuries sustained by him
during a quarrel with some other individuals. The CPIO replied on January
15, 2008 and informed him that, on enquiry, it was found that no cognisible
offence was made out in the case. Not satisfied with this reply, he had
moved the first Appellate Authority on February 12, 2008 but it is not clear
if that authority passed any orders on his appeal.
3. Both the parties were present during the hearing and made their
submissions. It is true that much of the application of the Appellant
addressed to the CPIO was in the nature of a grievance against the Police for
not registering a case other than one under Sections 107/151 of the CrPC.
The Appellant had sought to know the action taken on various
representations and complaints he had sent to different authorities in this
regard. The CPIO was completely silent about this in his reply. In the course
CIC/WB/A/2008/00713-SM
of the hearing, the Appellant showed us the medical certificate from the
hospital concerned where he was taken for treatment after this fracas. The
certificate shows he had sustained a fracture. On the other hand, the
Respondent submitted that since the medical authorities had reported that
his injury was a simple one caused by a blunt object, no cognisible offence
was found to have been committed. However, a cursory glance at the report
produced by the Appellant shows that there might have been some error in
the Police assessment of the injury caused to him. In view of this, it is
absolutely essential to know what action the police authorities had taken on
the representations and complaints he had filed in this regard.
4. We, therefore, direct the CPIO to provide to the Appellant within 10
working days from the receipt of this order certified copies of the action
taken report, if any, on his complaints/representations. We also like to
draw the attention of the Police Commissioner of Delhi to this case with the
suggestion that he may like to get this matter enquired into afresh in view
of the apparently contradictory medical reports in existence in this case.
5. With the above direction and observation, the case is thus disposed
off.
6. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties including the
Commissioner of Police, Delhi.
(Satyananda Mishra)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied
against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the
CPIO of this Commission.
(Vijay Bhalla)
Assistant Registrar
CIC/WB/A/2008/00713-SM