CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No.CIC/WB/A/2008/01164 dated 2.6.2008
Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19
Appellant - Maj. Gen. V. K. Singh
Respondent - Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)
Facts
:
In a request of 25.4.08 Maj. Gen. V. K.Singh of Palam Vihar, Gurgaon
applied to the CPIO, CBI seeking information as follows:
“The following up to date information, Para/point wise in detail, duly
typed and certified, regarding the book titled THE KAOBOYS OF
R&AW-DOWN MEMORY LANE, written by B. Raman, is required
urgently, regarding the violation or non violation of Official Secrets
Act (OSA), 1923 and Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860.”
This was followed by a series of 28 questions concluding with the following:
“Does this not violate the relevant sections of the OSA and IPC?”
The questions from Sr. No. 29 to 34, however, read as follows:
“29. Did the author seek permission to publish the book from
RAW, Cabinet Secretariat or any other Govt. department? If
yes, provide copies of permission and files notings.
30. Has the Ministry of Home Affairs, Cabinet Secretariat, RAW
or any other govt. department filed with CBI any complaint
regarding the violations of the Official Secrets Act, 1923 and
IPC, 1860 in respect of the book? If yes, provide copy of the
compliant.
31. Has any action been initiated against the author and
publisher of the book under the Official Secrets Act, 1923
and IPC 1860? If yes, provide copy of the same. If no,
reasons thereof may be provided.
32. Is the CBI aware of the violations of the Official Secrets Act,
1923 and IPC 1860 in the book?
1
33. What action has the CBI taken with regard to the book?
Copies of relevant correspondence and file notings may
please be provided?
34. Does the CBI contemplate initiating action against the author
and publisher for violation of the Official Secrets Act, 1923
and IPC 1860? If yes, copy of FIR, charge sheet and other
relevant documents may be provided. If not, the reasons
thereof may be provided.”
Addl SP(P)/CPIO of the Policy & Coordination Division, CBI transferred
this application to Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh SP & CPIO ACU-IX CBI New Delhi
on 5.2.08 upon which Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh offered the following response to
appellant Maj. Gen. V. K. Singh through a letter of 21.5.08.
S. Serial given in the Reply of ACU-IX Branch/CBI
No. application
1. Point No. 1 to 28 In these points opinion of CBI has been sought on
extracts of the Book titled ‘THE KAOBOYS OF
R&AW – DOWN MEMORY LANE” written by B.
Raman/
2. Point No. 29 Not related to CBI
3. Point No. 30 No complaint filed with CBI/ACU-IX Branch in this
regard.
4. Point No. 31 No. Not applicable. There is no information of
commission of any such offence with ACU-IX
Branch/CBI
5. Point No. 32 No such violation has been reported to ACU-IX
Branch / CBI
6. Point No. 33 No action has been taken by the CBI/ACU-IX
Branch with regard to the book.
7. Point No. 34 As on date, no action is contemplated by CBI/ACU-
IX Branch against the author of the book under
OSA 1923 and IPC 1860.
Aggrieved with this response, which he describe as “The information given
is incomplete and evasive.” the General moved his first appeal before Shri M. M.
Oberoi, DIG & FAA CBI on 31.5.08.
On not receiving a response, appellant moved a second appeal in which he
has stated that the concluding question of his application has been only partly
2
answered since it does not give reasons for not taking action against the author
and praying as follows:
“The CBI may be asked to provide the complete information
(Certified copies) sought in the application regarding the book titled
THE KAOBOYS of R&AW: DOWN MEMORY LANE, written by B.
Raman. The information may be provided within 48 hours under
section 7 (1) of the Act, since its concerns the liberty of the
applicant. The charge sheet filed by the CBI in the court of the
CMM has been listed for hearing on 10.7.2008. In case the learned
judge decides to take cognisance, he may issue a warrant for arrest
of the applicant. The applicant had filed an application for
anticipatory bail in the Court of the Session Judge on 26.9.2007,
which has still not been decided. A petition under section 401 of
CrPC has been filed in the High Court on 23.4.2008 against the
orders of the Sessions Judge for the anticipatory bail hearing to be
held ‘in camera’, as requested by the CBI. Another petition under
Section 482 CrPC has been filed in the High Court on 9.5.2008 for
quashing the FIR and charge sheet. Both petitions are listed for
hearing on 17.7.2008. If the information is made available to the
applicant in time it will assist him in obtaining bail once the CMM
takes cognisance of the charge sheet.”
In response to the appeal notice, we have received the comments of Shri
Sanjay Kumar Singh, CPIO and SP ACU-IX together with which he has
submitted a copy of the decision of 1sdt appellate authority. Dr. M. M. Oberoi,
which is dated 30.6.08 and was therefore within the mandated time limit for
disposal of a first appeal u/s 19(6). Appellant Maj. Gen. V. K. Singh had in fact
moved his second appeal before the conclusion of the mandatory time limit. In
this order Dr. Oberoi has held as follows:
“The appeal is not at all on merit and not maintainable, hence liable
to be dismissed. In view of the above, the undersigned uphold the
reply furnished by the CPIO. Appeal is, therefore, dismissed.”
In his response to the appeal notice, CPIO Shri Sanjay K. Singh has
contended that “the words “opinion and advices” occurring in Section 2 (f) of the
RTI mean “opinion and advices” that are part of record and not the ones which
are not in existence. It has been held in the decisions by CIC that CPIO cannot
provide something which is non-est and not part of record. RTI Act does not
3
cover material including opinions, which are not available at the time of request.”
He has then gone on to submit that information available with respondent has
been provided to appellant.
The appeal was heard on 10.10.2008. The following are present:
Appellant
Maj. Gen. V. K. Singh
Mr. Har Mohan Rai
Respondent
Shri Sanjay K. Singh, SP/ACU-IX, CBI
Shri Madan Mohan Oberoi, DIG/AC-III, CBIAppellant Maj. Gen. V. K. Singh submitted that because the disclosures
made by Raman in the book referred to are infact in violation of the Official
Secrets Act. action under that Act should have been taken against the delinquent
former official of RAW.
DECISION NOTICE
As summarized above, in his application to the CBI the bulk of the
questions of the General are with regard to whether the author of the book in
question is or is not in violation of the law. This can in fact be the subject matter
of a petition addressed to Director, CBI or to the authorities concerned in the
Ministry of Home Affairs concerned with National Security. This cannot be the
subject of a RTI application. Under sec. 2(j), this right has been clearly defined as
follows:
Sec. 2(j)
“right to information” means the right to information accessible
under this Act, which is held by or under the control of any public
authority1 and includes the right to–
(i) inspection of work, documents, records;
(ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or
records;
1
Underlined by us
4
(iii) taking certified samples of material;
(iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes,
video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through
printouts where such information is stored in a computer or
in any other device;”
Moreover sec. 2(f) is explicit in defining the word ‘information’ by opening
with the remark that “information means any material in any form2”. In other
words such information must be held in material form even where it is only an
opinion or advice.
Maj. Gen. Singh’s objection to the response to his point No. 34 is also not
sustainable because the answer to Point No. 30 states clearly that no complaint
had been filed with the CBI/ACU-IX Branch in this regard. That is clearly why no
action has been contemplated against the author of the book. On the basis of the
above, we come to the conclusion that this appeal is unsustainable and is
hereby dismissed.
However, since the response of the CBI has made it clear that no complaint
has been filed with them thus far with regard to the book in question violating a
law upon which they could have taken action, it is open to appellant Maj. Gen.
V. K. Singh to move such a complaint before the appropriate authority in
CBI seeking such further action, as is warranted by the law.
Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the
parties.
(Wajahat Habibullah)
Chief Information Commissioner
10.10.2008
2
Underlined by us for emphasis
5
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
10.10.2008
6