CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No.CIC/WB/A/2007/01245 dated 12.10.2007
Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19
Appellant - Prof. (Dr.) S.C. Pandey
Respondent - Dy. Commissioner of Police (DCP) Police Control Room
Facts
:
By an application of 21.5.07 Dr. S. C. Pandey of Saket, New Delhi applied
to the DCP (PCR) Model Town, New Delhi seeking the following information:
“I had made three phone calls to your office as follows:-
Call made from Call made to phone Date and time
Phone No. No.
29561893 100 6.5.2007 at 11.10 AM
———— 100 8.5.2007 at 6.30 PM
———— 23490311 8.5.2007 at 6.30 PM
(Insp. P. Singh)It is requested to very kindly make me available total details and
action taken on my said communications on PCR form and
recording thereof u/s RTI Act.”
To this he received response on 25.5.07 as follows:
“I am to inform you that your request to provide the certified copy of
PCR call forms lodged by you on 6 and 9.6.07 has been considered
and could not be acceded to under section 8 (1) (h) of RTI Act-
2005.”
Upon this Dr Pandey moved an appeal before the Jt. Commissioner of
Police (Operations) on 6.6.07, pleading that “This is essential, Sir, in order to
remove attached stigma which I hate most. It’s highly painful and anguishing.
The appeal may kindly be accepted.”
Dr. Aditya Arya, DCP (Operations) in his order of 18.7.07 directed as
follows:
1
“I am to inform you that as per the report of DCP/ Central District
the information sought by you can not be provided under section 8
(1) (h) of Right to Information Act, 2005, till the case FIR No. 163/07
dated u/s 341/34 IPC, P. S. Jama Masjid is put in court.”
In the meantime, by an application of 18.5.07 Prof. Pandey had also moved
an application before the DCP (Central Distt.) Daryaganj, Delhi with the following
request:
“It is requested to send me immediately one authenticated copy
each of the following documents under section RTI Act.
(i) Copy of the FIR.
(ii) 5 statements of the persons cited above.
(iii) Bail Grant Certificate.
To this he received a response of 13.6.07 from Shri Alok Kumar IPS, PIO
Central Distt. once more refusing the information u/s 8(1) (h) of the RTI Act.
Against this Dr. Pandey represented on 3.9.07 to the Commissioner of Police,
followed by an appeal before the Jt. Commissioner of Police (Northern Range)
on 26.9.07 with the following prayer:
(a) In view of 3 and 4 as per above, the JCP (Northern
Range), Delhi Police is requested to very kindly condone
the time bar period and admit this first appeal.
(b) Order the DCP/ Central District to make me available the
certified copies of my communicated PCR information’s
lying with the JCP: Operations and my personal written
statement document handed over to Shri Satpal Singh,
an ASI cum Investigating Officer (No. 5258/C PIS No.
28776483) at 12.30 hrs on 6.5.2007, then posted an
officer at Police Station, Jama Masjid, Delhi-110006.”
However, before receiving an order on this appeal, Dr. Pandey has moved
a second appeal before us with the following prayer:
“a) Request for making me available a certified copy of my
handwritten statement document submitted at Police
Station, Jama Masjid, Delhi-110006 on 6.5.2007 at 12.30
pm.
b) Request for making me available certified copy of PCR
forms from the office of Joint Commissioner of Police:
2
Operations, Delhi Police Headquarters, I. P. Estate, New
Delhi-110002.”
The appeal was heard on 12.1.2009. The following are present:
Appellant
Prof. (Dr.) S.C. Pandey
Respondents
Sh. Rajaram Yadav, SHO Jama Masjid
Sh. Satya Pal, ASI
Sh. Narender Kumar, ASI PCR
Sh. Satya Prakash, ASI PCR
Ms. Shanti, ACP-cum-APIO, PCR
Sh. Jaspal Singh, IPS, DCP Central Distt.
With regard to DCP Central Distt, Shri Jaspal Singh, IPS submitted that all
the three documents sought by appellant, copy of the FIR and the bail grant
certificate are now the property of the concerned Court. He, however, submitted
that no statements have been recorded or retained, copies of which could be
provided to appellant.
We have received request for leave of absence from Shri Ajay Kumar, DCP
(Security) and Dr. P.S. Bhushan, DCP (PCR), which has been accepted.
However, Ms. Shanti, ACP cum PIO PCR submitted copies of PCR forms,
already provided to appellant Dr. S.C. Pandey. Dr. Pandey, however, protested
that these documents have in fact been tampered with and their dates changed.
This has prejudicially affected him.
DECISION NOTICE
In the appeal concerning the case against DCP Central, if the documents
have been transferred to the concerned Court, the request for information was
required u/s 6(3) of the RTI Act also to have been transferred to the public
authority holding the information. This will now be done within five working days
of the date of receipt of this Decision Notice.
3
If the public authority does not hold some documents, the applicant is
required to be informed of this. While confirming to the appellant Dr. Pandey the
transfer of the request for disclosure to the concerned public authority, PIO / DCP
(Central) will also, therefore, inform appellant Dr. Pandey of the status of the five
documents which he states are written statements of parties.
On the question of tampering with the information provided with regard to
PCR calls. appellant Dr. Pandey had promised in the hearing to provide a copy of
the decision in first appeal. Subsequently in response to a telephone call from
the Registry, Dr. Pandey had offered to deliver the papers on Monday, the 19th
January, 2009. No such papers have been received till 27.1.09.
In this case if there is a suspicion of tampering with records, this makes this
a case of criminal liability and appellant Dr. Pandey is advised to register an FIR
in this matter. However, if not satisfied with the information provided he may
either move a first appeal or if already moved, a second appeal before us if not
already time barred.
With this the appeal is allowed in part. There will be no costs. The
Decision regarding the information sought from DCP (Central) the decision was
announced in the hearing. The full decision notice is announced in open
chamber on this 27th day of January, 2009.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Wajahat Habibullah)
Chief Information Commissioner
27.1.2009
4
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.
(Pankaj Shreyaskar)
Joint Registrar
27.1.2009
5