Mr.Satpal Singh vs Delhi Police on 12 June, 2010

                         Central Information Commission
                   Room No. 5, Club Building, Near Post Office
                    Old J.N.U. Campus, New Delhi - 110067
                               Tel No: 26161997

                                                                  Case No. CIC/SS/A/2010/000090

       Name of Appellant                                      :        Sh. Satpal Mahey

       Name of Respondent                                     :         Delhi Police, 
                                                                        Ashok Vihar, Delhi
                                                               

                                               ORDER

Sh. Satpal Mahey, the Appellant, sought certain information in respect of his
complaint / grievance regarding some property. In fact, the Appellant sought statements
of witnesses, enquiry report etc. and other matters connected therewith. Sh. Brahm Singh,
the PIO / Addl. Commissioner of Police, vide his letter dated 4.07.2009, informed the
Appellant that his complaint had been enquired into and there was no evidence to
substantiate FIR complaint. The statement of witnesses were also provided to the
Appellant. However, not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the Appellant filed an
appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA). The FAA also upheld the decision of
the CPIO. The Appellant was also advised to raise his grievance with the concerned
authorities and not under the RTI Act. Hence, the present appeal before the Commission.

The matter was heard on 8.06.2010
The Appellant was not present.

Sh. Prem Nath, ACP, Sh. Mir Singh, SHO, S. Bijender Singh, ASI, Sh. Sandeep
Singh, Sub-Inspector and Sh. Suresh Chand, SI represented the Respondent Public
Authority.

During the hearing the Respondents submit that the complete requisite
information available on record and permissible under the RTI Act, has already been
provided to the Appellant.

After hearing the Respondents and on perusal of the relevant documents the
Commission finds no infirmity in the replies of the Respondents.

With these observations the matter is disposed off accordingly.

(Sushma Singh) 
                                                                          Information Commissioner 
12.06.2010