CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 415, 4th Floor,
Block IV, Old JNU Campus,
New Delhi -110 067
Tel: + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC /WB/A/2007/01320/SG/2265
Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2007/01320/SG
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Sanjay Gupta
F- 69 B, Gali No.12
Laxmi Nagar Delhi - 110092.
Respondent : Deputy Commissioner of Police &
Public Information officer
Govt of NCT of Delhi
O/o the Deputy Commissioner of Police
1st Floor, Defense Colony, Police Station
New Delhi.
RTI application filed on : 20/06/2007
PIO replied : 25/07/2007
First appeal filed on : 08/08/2007
First Appellate Authority order : 07/09/2007
Second Appeal filed on : 29/03/2008
The appellant had sought certain information from Govt. of NCT of Delhi in respect
of armed license validity.
Sl. Information Sought PIO’s Reply
1. What is the rules of validating Validation of licenses to All India and other
armed license to all India basis. State basis is as per Rules of Govt. of India
Furnish copy of the rules. letter no. V-11026/8/89-Arms, V-
2. What is the rules of validating 11026/106/94 dated 11.10.1995 and letter
armed license to other states, no. F-13/1/1997-H(a)1523 dated 4.4.1997
furnish copy of the rules? and F.13/25/98/HG/1073.
3. Security aspect is measured while While validating armed license security of
validating armed license? individuals are considered. It is considered
4. If yes, then how many licenses as per recommendations of Delhi
you have validated all India basis Government.
and other states after proper
security verifications?
5. Furnish Grade by which you have All cases for extension of area validity of
validated armed licenses to all NPB arms license for all India are
India basis. recommended by DCP/Lic and scrutinized
in this office in the light of the
policy/guidelines adopted by this
Government.
Not satisfied with the replies of PIO the appellant filed first appeal.
The First Appellate Authority ordered:
The First Appellate Authority ordered that “During the course of hearing, Sh. Sanjay Gupta
stated that he was satisfied with he information received in respect of point no.1 and 2 and
admitted of having received the copies of the policy guidelines, but had not received complete
information in respect of point no. 3, 4, and 5 of his application. During the personal hearing,
it was informed to Sh. Sanjay Gupta, the appellant, that as regard to information pertaining to
point nos.3 and 4 of his application, the cases for extension of area validity are recommended
as per the policy guidelines, copies of which have already been furnished to him. As per the
policy guidelines, reasonable restrictions are being imposed on the right to posses arms of any
nomenclature and their carrying/movement from one part of the country to the other for
ensuring peace and safety. The extension of area validity for all-india/states is not
recommended solely on the grounds of reasons of security because of perceived deterioration
of law and order problem in a state. However, personal security of the applicant is given due
weightage for grant of extension of area validity if there exists any police record about a
threat perception to the applicant. As regard to the other information at point no. 4 and 5, a list
of license issued on the grounds of personal security etc. is not maintained separately. The
appeal is disposed off.”
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present.
Appellant : Absent
Respondent : Dr. Rajneesh Garg ACP Licencing and APIO
The respondent explained that he has provided the information. The appellant’s
dissatisfaction arises from the fact that the PIO is unable to give the number of
licenses issued on All-India basis based on Security concerns. The PIO states they do
not maintain a record in this manner.
Decision:
The appeal is dismissed.
The information has been provided to the appellant.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
18th March 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)