CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2009/000024 dated 9.2.2009
Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19
Appellant - Shri A. K. Dhyani
Respondent - Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)
Decision announced: 5.3.2010
Facts
:
By an application of 26.5.08 Shri Anil Kumar Dhyani of Mayur Vihar,
Phase-1, Delhi applied to the DOPT seeking the following information:
“With reference to the above mentioned subject, I would like to
inspect all the complete Original Files / documents / records /
statements of all the witnesses recorded under sec. 161 of Cr.P.C.
etc. of the above mentioned case number under sub sec. (1) of
Sec. 7 of the Act as Form ‘A’ and process fee of Rs. 10/- in cash
are enclosed herewith for your further necessary action.”
The reference is to a case registered in CBI’s Anti-Corruption Branch on
30.5’02. This application was forwarded by Under Secretary Shri Chander
Prakash, DOPT, who received the application on 6.6.08, to the JD (P), CBI,
North Block, on 11.6.’08 as below:
“Since subject matter of information pertains to the CBI, the same is
hereby transferred to the CBI under Sec. 6(3) of the RTI Act for
further appropriate action.”
This was then further transferred on 16.6.08 to SP, CBI, ACB, New Delhi.
CPIO Shri Sumit Sharan, SP, CBI, ACB, New Delhi in his letter of 3.7.08 then
informed Shri Dhyani, as below:
“It is intimated that all the relied upon documents and statements
under Sec. 161 of CrPC have already been supplied to you in the
Court.”
Shri Dhyani has then moved an appeal before the DIG, CBI, ACB, New
Delhi on 8.7.08 on the following grounds:
1
(i) “I have an doubt about the authenticity of some of
the statements of the witnesses which were
recorded and filed by the CBI in the court because
when I shows some statements to the witnesses
who gave those statements before the
Investigating Officer during investigation they told
me that they have not given any such kind of
statement before the I.O. and they denied their
statements.
(ii) I also would like to know the statements of all
other witnesses whose statements are recorded
by the I.O. during investigation but neither filed
those statements in the Court nor were the copies
of such statements provided to me till date by the
CBI.
(iii) As the trial is already going on in the court so I
think there should be no harm to show me all the
complete original Files / Documents / Records /
Statement of all the witnesses recorded under
Section 161 of CrPC for inspection at this stage.”
Upon this Shri Sudhir Kumar Saxena, DIG, CBI, ACB New Delhi directed
as follows:
“If the appellant has any grievance he is free to approach the trial
Court for redressal of his grievance. Additional information asked
for by the appellant cannot be supplied to him as it would impede
the prosecution and exempted u/s 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
Accordingly the appeal is disposed of.”
Shri Dhyani has then approached this Commission with a second appeal
praying as follows:
“In the premises, the Applicant most respectfully prays that this
Hon’ble Commission may kindly –
i) Allow me to inspect all the complete original files /
documents / records / statements of all the witnesses (both
whether it was filed or not filed in the court) recorded u/s 161
of CrPC by the CBI during investigation and I can take the
photocopies which ever is desired to me.
ii) Instruct the 1st Appellate Authority to provide me all the
complete data available in their computers of my case in
“Pen Drive” as per under Sec. 2(j)(iv) of the Act.
2
iii) Pass such other and further orders(s) and / or direction(s) as
is deem fit and proper by this Commission in the present
facts and circumstances of the case.”
The appeal was heard on 5.3.2010. The following are present:
Appellant
Shri Anil Kumar Dhyani
Respondents
Shri Sumit Sharan, SP, CBI
Appellant Shri Anil Kumar Dhyani submitted that as per his information
there were certain witnesses whose statements had been recorded, which do not
form part of the record submitted to the Court. It is for this reason that he would
like to inspect the file. CPIO Shri Sumit Sharan, SP, CBI on the other hand
submitted that all documents relied upon by the CBI in the prosecution have
been, in original, transferred to the Court.
DECISION NOTICE
We have in earlier cases also held that once a trial Court has taken
cognizance of a case and charge sheet filed documents that concern that case
become the property of that Court and therefore deemed to be held by it, even if
they may be in the physical possession of the prosecuting agency. For this
reason, appellant is advised that should he wish to inspect documents contained
in the files of CBI which pertain to the present case, but which he suspects have
not been submitted to the Court, he is free to move an application accordingly
before the Court. Besides, the trial Court itself is subject to the provisions of the
RTI Act. If, therefore, the trial Court was to concede appellant’s request for
inspection of such records, it will be open to the trial Court to transfer the
application, if necessary, under sub sec. (3) of Sec. 6 of the RTI Act, 2005, to the
agency holding the information sought. In either case, however, ruling upon the
plea of appellant Shri Anil Kumar Dhyani is beyond the jurisdiction of this
Commission. The appeal is therefore dismissed.
3
Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to
the parties.
(Wajahat Habibullah)
Chief Information Commissioner
5.3.2010
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 K.P. Shreyaskar)
Joint Registrar
5.3.2010
4