Central Information Commission, New Delhi
File No.CIC/WB/A/2010/000867SM
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19)
Date of hearing : 2 February 2011
Date of decision : 8 February 2011
Name of the Appellant : Shri Ajay Sansare
C/o. Shri N R Sansare,
Flat No.1, Grihashobha Hsng So.
Ground Floor, Anand Nagar, Behind
Tiwari Hospital, Nashik Road, Nashik,
Maharashtra.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, Central Bureau of Investigation,
Anti Corruption Branch,
Tanna House, 11A, Nathalal Parekh
Marg,
Colaba, Mumbai - 400 039.
The Appellant was present in person.
On behalf of the Respondent, Shri Parveen Salunke, DIG was present.
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Satyananda Mishra
2. We heard this case through video conferencing. The Appellant was
present in the Nashik studio of the NIC. The Respondent was present in the
Mumbai studio. We heard their submissions.
3. The Appellant had wanted the copies of the correspondence between
the CBI and the CVC as well as with the RPF. The CPIO had denied the
CIC/WB/A/2010/000867SM
information by claiming that the case was under trial and the desired
information as exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1) (h) of the Right to
Information (RTI) Act. The Appellate Authority had also endorsed the decision
of the CPIO.
4. During the hearing, the Appellant submitted that he was entitled to this
information under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The Respondent on the
other hand argued that the disclosure of the information would adversely affect
the case pending for trial and would impede the prosecution of the offender in
the case. They clarified that the correspondence between the CBI and the CVC
as well as the RPF concerned sanction for prosecution and contained the
details of the evaluation of the evidence available to the prosecution in the case
including the strategy proposed to be adopted to bring the offender to book.
During the pendency of the trial, they argued, the disclosure of this information
would impede the course of prosecution and make it very difficult, if not
impossible, to book the offender.
5. We tend to agree with the above contention and, therefore, do not think
it appropriate to disclose this information while the trial is pending before the
competent court. In any case, that court has the full liberty to summon such
records and take appropriate action including disclosing the same to the
accused.
6. The appeal is disposed off accordingly.
7. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
(Satyananda Mishra)
CIC/WB/A/2010/000867SM
Chief 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.
(Vijay Bhalla)
Deputy Registrar
CIC/WB/A/2010/000867SM