CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2008/0098 dated 3-2-2008
Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19
Appellant: Shri Kamal Shandilya
Respondent: Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) PCR
FACTS
By an application of 23-4-07 Shri Kamal Shandilya of Sheikh Sarai, Delhi
applied to the DCP, PCR seeking the following information:
“I Kamal Shandilya, S/o Shri Sant Ram Shandilya, R/o J-4D
Sheikh Sarai, Phase-II, Ne3w Delhi-17 made 3 calls to 100
number on 15th April 2007 respectively at around 3.00 am, 4.00
am and 4.30 am from mobile No. 9999077665, DD numbers of
two calls are 29 and 32 of per my knowledge please give me
certified detailed copy of three calls.”
To this he received a response dated 10-5-07 from Shri Ajay Kumar,
PIO, PCR refusing the information on grounds of Section 8 (1) (h) but giving
no further reason therefore. Aggrieved, Shri Kamal Shandilya moved first
appeal before JCP (Operations) Police Hqrs. on 8-6-07 pleading as follows:
“That the appellant is entitled for the information applied to the
competent authority as the above said calls were made by him
and he is the complainant thereof and hence the appellant has
every right to get the copies of the said information.”
However, Dr. Aditya Arya, JCP (Operations) Delhi in his order dated 20-
7-07, ruled as follows:
“Your request has already been turned down by the PIO/ PCR
vide letter No. 1390/ RTI Cell/ PCR dated 10.5.07 and sent to
you through UPC on 12.5.07 under section 8 (1) (h) of RTI Act,
2005 as it would impede the process of investigation in case FIR
No. 404/2007 u/s 323/376/511/506/34 IPC, P. S. Malviya Nagar
and the same is exempted from disclosure under section 8 (1) (h)
of Right to Information Act, 2005.”
Shri Kamal Shandilya’s prayer in his second appeal before us is as
below:
“It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the impugned
order dated 20.7.2007 vide No. 497/ P. Sec./ Jt. CP (OPS)
may kindly be set aside and the PIO may kindly be directed
to supply the above mentioned information and copies of
above mentioned documents as applied by the appellant1
vide application dated 23.4.2007 to the appellant, as per law
and in the interest of justice.”
Shri Kamal Shandilya has based his prayer on the following arguments:
“That the appellant is entitle for the information applied to the
competent authority as the above said calls were made by him
and he is the complainant thereof and hence the appellant has
every right to get the copies of the said information.”
In response to our appeal notice, PIO, Dr. P.S. Bhushan, DCP, PCR
has submitted detailed statement which, however, simply re-traces processing
of the RTI application concluding with ground for refusal and submitting that
the case is still pending and copy of PCR form may not be provided.
The appeal was heard on 26-6-2009. Following are present.
Respondents
Ms. Shanti Devi, ACP/ PCR.
Shri Narender Kumar, ASI.
Although informed of the date of hearing by our notice of 15th June
2009 appellant Shri Kamal Shandilya opted not to be present
We have received representations dated 24-6-09 from ACP, Hq.
submitting that Shri Ajay Kumar, DCP is on earned leave and DCP Dr. P.S.
Bhushan has on the other hand sought exemption from attending and
nominated Smt. Shanti Devi, ACP cum APIO, PCR to attend the hearing on his
behalf.
Smt. Shanti Devi submitted that the case is still under investigation and it
was considered appropriate to withhold the information sought.
DECISION NOTICE
The information sought by Shri Kamal Shandilya is with regard to a
record of calls made by none other than himself and not by a third party. PIO
has rejected this application out of hand without explaining how the disclosure
of information regarding calls made by the party himself can possibly impede
the process of investigation. Such disclosure is mandated when seeking
2
exemption under sub Section 1 of Section 8 of the RTI Act as ruled by Hon’ble
Ravindra Bhat J in W.P.No.3114/2007 Shri Bhagat Singh Vs. Chief
Information Commissioner & Ors.
In light of the above the orders of the Appellate Authority Dr. Aditya
Arya, JCP (Operations) are set aside and PIO Dr. P.S. Bhushan, DCP, PCR
will now supply to appellant Shri Kamal Shandilya the details of the
information sought by him within 10 working days of the date of receipt
of this decision notice. This Appeal is thus allowed. There will be no costs.
Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost
to the parties.
(Wajahat Habibullah)
Chief Information Commissioner
26-6-2009
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
26-6-2009
3