Central Information Commission Judgements

Jitender Garg vs Indian Army/Cbi on 22 February, 2010

Central Information Commission
Jitender Garg vs Indian Army/Cbi on 22 February, 2010
        CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
      Room No. 308, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066


                      File No.CIC/SM/C/2009/001010/LS
                      Jitender Garg Vs Indian Army/CBI

                                                             Dated : 22.2.2010
       This is in continuation of this Commission's proceedings dated
13.1.2010. As scheduled, the matter is called for hearing today dated
22.2.2010. The appellant is represented by Advocate Jitender Garg. Army
is represented by Shri Amitabh Mukheerjee. CBI is represented by Shri
M.M. Oberoi, DIG; Shri Sanjay Kumar, SP & Shri D.S. Chauhan,
Inspector. Shri Oberoi submits a written representation which is taken on
record and copy thereof provided to the appellant's counsel. It is Shri
Oberoi's submission that copy of the SP's report can not be provided to the
appellant on the following grounds :-
(i)    that the CBI has filed two charge-sheets and also two complaints in
       the matter and further investigation is still continuing and, therefore,
       section 8 (1) (h) of the RTI Act is applicable;
(ii)   that further investigation is still continuing which again attracts
       section 8 (1) (h);
(iii) that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court had ordered providing copies of
       certain documents to the appellant but the said order has been stayed
       by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, meaning thereby that so long as
       the stay prevails, no documents can be provided to the appellant; &
(iv) that SP's report is not a relied upon documents by the CBI and,
       therefore, the appellant can not have a claim on this document.

2.     He also relied upon paras 2.3 & 2.4 of his representation which are
extracted below :-
       "2.3 It is submitted that SP's Report is a confidential documents,
       containing the proceedings of investigation, details of arguments to
       rebut the defence, discussion of evidence in favour of and against
       accused persons as well as discussion on the credibility of
       informants, complainants and sources, etc. It is meant only for the
       Competent Authority and the contents thereof are not to be
       disclosed to other persons.
       2.4     It is further mentioned that this case pertains to the leakage of
       classified information from Indian navy and therefore the SP's
       Report of this case contains discussion of various secret and
       sensitive documents, which can not be disclosed to the complainant
       under the RTI Act. It is also submitted that the documents involved
       in this case have bearing on our national security and they, being the
       classified documents, contain information, disclosure of which to
       any unauthorized person is prejudicial to the safety and security of
       our country. Copies of these documents have not been supplied to
       the accused persons under 207 Cr.PC. the issue of supply copies of
       these documents is still pending before the Hon'ble Supreme
       Court."
               It is, thus, his forceful submission that the request of the
       appellant is misconceived and contrary to the provisions of RTI Act.

3.     On the other hand, Adv. Garg would submit that if the Hon'ble
Supreme Court has stayed the order of Delhi High Court regarding
disclosure of certain documents, a copy of Supreme Court order should be
provided to him.

4.     DIG, CBI has no objection to provide a copy thereof to the
appellant.

                                DECISION
5.     In view of the above, we are of the opinion that SP's report
requested for by the appellant is not disclosable at this stage u/s 8 (1) (h) of
the RTI Act when the matter is under investigation/trial. However, Shri
M.M. Oberoi, DIG, CBI, New Delhi, is hereby directed to provide a copy
of the order of the Supreme Court under reference to the appellant in 02
weeks time, with a copy thereof to the Commission.

6.     The matter is decided accordingly.
                                                                       Sd/-
                                                             (M.L. Sharma)
                                          Central 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.


(K.L. Das)
Assistant Registrar

Address of parties :-
1.

Shri M.M. Oberoi
DIG, AC-I, CBI,
Block No 3, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi

2. Shri Amitabh Mukheerjee
Addl Dte (Dis & Vig),
A-Wing, Sena Bhawan,
IHQ of MoD (Army),
New Delhi-110011

3. Shri Jitendra Garg
Lawers Chambers-137,
Patiala House Court,
New Delhi-110003