CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No. CIC/ WB/A/2009/000727 dated 18.7.2009
Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19
Name of the Appellant : Shri Arvinder Singh
Name of the Public Authority : Deputy Commissioner of Police,
South East District, Delhi
BACKGROUND
:
Shri Arvinder Singh the appellant, vide RTI application dated 5.1.2009 sought
copy of the FIR No.21/07 and documents connected therewith. The CPIO gave
pointwise reply to the appellant. Not satisfied with the reply of CPIO the appellant
filed first appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA), who found no deficiency
in the reply of the CPIO. Subsequently, the appellant filed second appeal before the
Commission.
2. The matter was heard on 12.1.2010.
3. The appellant was present.
4. Shri S.K. Jain, Addl.DCP/SED, Arun Tyagi, SI and Shri Harish Chander, SI
represented the respondent.
DECISION:
5. During the hearing the appellant submitted that he had not been given a copy
of the FIR No.21/07 lodged at PS, Amar Colony and the documents connected
therewith. He further stated that the case has been withdrawn by Shri H.S. Gill on
4.12.2009 in the court of Shri Saurabh Kulshreshtra, MM, Patiala House and therefore
he should be given a copy of the FIR and the documents connected therewith. He also
stated that specific reply to his queries whether the mutation of the said property is
based on unsigned documents and a copy of the enquiry report in respect of the
disputed property has not been given to him. The respondent on the other hand
submit that the FIR No.21/07 dated 17.9.2007 was filed not at the behest of Shri H.S.
Gill but on the complaint of the MCD and that this matter is not settled between Shri
Amrik Singh and Shri H.S. Gill as alleged by the appellant. The investigation into the
matter has been completed and a charge-sheet has been filed in the court on
5.10.2009. The respondent also submit that the appellant, not being either the witness
or complainant, a copy of the FIR could not be given to him while this matter was
under investigation. Now, since the matter is pending trial in the court, the documents
can only be obtained from the concerned court. As regards point No.5, there was no
question of ascertaining ownership of the property based on fraud or forged signatures
as alleged by the appellant as this was not the issue on the case lodgedm by the MCD.
As regards providing copy of the enquiry report, the permissible part of the report can
be supplied on payment of Rs.2/- per page.
<
6. I find that the requisite information has been given by the respondent. I find no
reason to interfere in the orders of the respondent. With these observations the
matter is disposed off.
7. Notice of the decision be given free of cost to the parties.
<
<
(Sushma Singh)
Information Commissioner
12.1.2010