{"id":145070,"date":"2010-02-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-02-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010"},"modified":"2017-04-07T20:09:40","modified_gmt":"2017-04-07T14:39:40","slug":"shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010","title":{"rendered":"Shri Vijendra Rana vs Central Bureau Of Investigations &#8230; on 5 February, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Central Information Commission<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Shri Vijendra Rana vs Central Bureau Of Investigations &#8230; on 5 February, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>                         CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION\n                          Appeal No. CICWB\/A\/2009\/000958 dated 26.10.2009\n                             Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19\n\n\nAppellant        -          Shri Vijendra Rana\nRespondent           -      Central Bureau of Investigations (CBI)\n                                   Decision announced : 5.2.2010\n\n\nFacts<\/pre>\n<p>:\n<\/p>\n<p>         By application of 11.8.09 addressed to Shri Kamlesh Kumar, Addl. District<br \/>\n&amp; Session Judge, Tees Hazari Courts, Delhi, Shri Vijendra Rana, lodged in<br \/>\nCentral Jail No. 3, Tihar, sought the following information regarding information<br \/>\nprovided to him on a parallel RTI request by CBI:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>         &#8220;With this as a background ,the appellant set forth to seek<br \/>\n         information from CBI\/ ACU-IX, vide the RTI query dated 5th Jan<br \/>\n         2009, for the basis of its allegations especially in light of denials by<br \/>\n         the &#8216;naval Authorities&#8217;.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>This is in the context of the following:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>         &#8220;2.    Please refer to PIO, Tis Hazari Courts letter No. 72829<br \/>\n                Admn. I\/RTI\/2009\/1927 dated 03rd August 2009, stating that<br \/>\n                documents sought have already been supplied to me.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>         3.     However, the undersigned appellant has not been provided<br \/>\n                the information\/ documents as sought vide his RTI<br \/>\n                application dated 5th Jan 2009. The details of this appeal,<br \/>\n                against denial of information, is accordingly set forth in the<br \/>\n                succeeding paragraphs.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>         Shri K.S. Rawat, PIO of the Administration Branch, Tees Hazari Courts,<br \/>\nDelhi forwarded this application to Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh, SP, CBI as follows:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>         &#8220;The information sought under the RTI Act, 2005 is not available in<br \/>\n         the Judicial Record pending in the court of Shri Brijesh Sethi, Ld.<br \/>\n         Spl. Judge, CBI, Delhi. Thus the information sought by the<br \/>\n         applicant may be provided at your end.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>         Consequently, in his letter of 14.9.09, Dr. M. M. Oberoi, DIG, AC-III, CBI<br \/>\nhas painstakingly provided a point wise reply, as below:\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                 1<\/span><\/p>\n<p> &#8220;This office has already examined your request in detail land<br \/>\nconveyed the decision. The information sought for is again<br \/>\nsupplied as under;\n<\/p>\n<p>A)     Information about search order\/ documents in support of<br \/>\n       conduct of search of the residence of Cdr. Vijendra Rana,<br \/>\n       7\/73, Arjun Vihar, New Delhi-10 on 12.7.2005 by Naval<br \/>\n       Authorities.\n<\/p>\n<p>Search Order\n<\/p>\n<p>i)     It is intimated that after investigation of this case, two charge<br \/>\n       sheets and two complaints under the Official Secrets Act,<br \/>\n       1923 have been filed in the Court of CMM, Delhi and<br \/>\n       presently the case is pending trail with Shri Brijesh Sethi, Ld.<br \/>\n       ASJ, Tis Hazari, Delhi, who is hearing the arguments on<br \/>\n       charge. He is in the process of forming a judicial opinion<br \/>\n       whether there is sufficient prima facie evidence or not to<br \/>\n       frame the charges against accused persons. CBI has<br \/>\n       placed all the material before the Ld. Judge, who is hearing<br \/>\n       the arguments.\n<\/p>\n<p>Composition of Search Party\n<\/p>\n<p>ii)    All documents related to search, seizure conducted by CBI<br \/>\n       has been provided to you under section 207 Cr. PC. This<br \/>\n       case was registered by CBI on 20.3.2006. For any other<br \/>\n       documents related to searches conducted by Navy prior to<br \/>\n       registration of this case, the reply may be sought from CPIO,<br \/>\n       Navy. A copy of your application has already been sent to<br \/>\n       naval authorities.\n<\/p>\n<p>Details of Independent witness present during the search\n<\/p>\n<p>iii)   All documents related to search seizure conducted by CBI<br \/>\n       has been provided to you under section 207 Cr. PC. This<br \/>\n       case was registered by CBI on 20.3.2006. For any other<br \/>\n       documents related to searches conducted by Navy prior to<br \/>\n       registration of this case, the reply may be sought from CPIO,<br \/>\n       Navy. A copy of your application has already been sent to<br \/>\n       naval authorities.\n<\/p>\n<p>Report submitted on completion of Search\n<\/p>\n<p>iv)  All documents related to search seizure conducted by CBI<br \/>\n     has been provided to you under section 207 Cr. PC. This<br \/>\n     case was registered by CBI on 20.3.2006. For any other<br \/>\n     documents related to searches conducted by Navy prior to<br \/>\n     registration of this case, the reply may be sought from CPIO,<br \/>\n     Navy. A copy of your application has already been sent to<br \/>\n     naval authorities.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                   2<\/span><\/p>\n<p> v)       Any other document\/ evidence in support of conduct of<br \/>\n         this search.\n<\/p>\n<p>It is intimated that after investigation of this case, two charge sheets<br \/>\nand two complaints under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 have been<br \/>\nfiled in the Court of CMM, Delhi and presently the case is pending<br \/>\ntrial with Shri Brijesh Sethi, Ld. ASJ, Tis Hazari, Delhi who is<br \/>\nhearing the arguments on charge. He is in the process of forming a<br \/>\njudicial opinion whether there is sufficient prima facie evidence or<br \/>\nnot to frame the charges against accused persons. CBI has placed<br \/>\nall the material before the Ld. Judge, who is hearing the arguments<br \/>\non charge.\n<\/p>\n<p>B) Documents in support of seizure of articles\/ items<br \/>\n     (including a computer) during the search of the residence<br \/>\n     of Cdr. Vijendra Rana, 7\/73, Arjun Vihar, New Delhi-10 on<br \/>\n     12.7.2005 by Naval Authorities.\n<\/p>\n<p>i) Seizure memo\/panchnama<br \/>\nIt is intimated that after investigation of this case, two charge sheets<br \/>\nand two complaints under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 have been<br \/>\nfiled in the Court of CMM, Delhi and presently the case is pending<br \/>\ntrial with Shri Brijesh Sethi, Ld. ASJ, Tis Hazari, Delhi who is<br \/>\nhearing the arguments on charge. He is in the process of forming a<br \/>\njudicial opinion whether there is sufficient prima facie evidence or<br \/>\nnot to frame the charges against accused persons. CBI has placed<br \/>\nall the material before the Ld. Judge, who is hearing the arguments.<br \/>\nThis case was registered by CBI on 20.3.2006. For any other<br \/>\ndocuments related to searches conducted by Navy prior to<br \/>\nregistration of this case, the reply may be sought from CPIO, Navy.<br \/>\nA copy of your application has already been sent to naval<br \/>\nauthorities.\n<\/p>\n<p>ii)      Details of articles\/ items seized.\n<\/p>\n<p>It is intimated that after investigation of this case, two charge sheets<br \/>\nand two complaints under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 have been<br \/>\nfiled in the Court of CMM, Delhi and presently the case is pending<br \/>\ntrial with Shri Brijesh Sethi, Ld. ASJ, Tis Hazari, Delhi who is<br \/>\nhearing the arguments on charge. He is in the process of forming a<br \/>\njudicial opinion whether there is sufficient prima facie evidence or<br \/>\nnot to frame the charges against accused persons. CBI has placed<br \/>\nall the material before the Ld. Judge, who is hearing the arguments.<br \/>\nThis case was registered by CBI on 20.3.2006. For any other<br \/>\ndocuments related to searches conducted by Navy prior to<br \/>\nregistration of this case, the reply may be sought from CPIO, Navy.<br \/>\nA copy of your application has already been sent to naval<br \/>\nauthorities.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                   3<\/span><\/p>\n<p> iii)     Details of seizing officer and personnel present during<br \/>\n         the seizure.\n<\/p>\n<p>It is intimated that after investigation of this case, two charge sheets<br \/>\nand two complaints under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 have been<br \/>\nfiled in the Court of CMM, Delhi and presently the case is pending<br \/>\ntrial with Shri Brijesh Sethi, Ld. ASJ, Tis Hazari, Delhi who is<br \/>\nhearing the arguments on charge. He is in the process of forming a<br \/>\njudicial opinion whether there is sufficient prima facie evidence or<br \/>\nnot to frame the charges against accused persons. CBI has placed<br \/>\nall the material before the Ld. Judge, who is hearing the arguments.<br \/>\nThis case was registered by CBI on 20.3.2006. For any other<br \/>\ndocuments related to searches conducted by Navy prior to<br \/>\nregistration of this case, the reply may be sought from CPIO, Navy.<br \/>\nA copy of your application has already been sent to naval<br \/>\nauthorities.\n<\/p>\n<p>iv)      Details of independent witnesses present during this<br \/>\n         seizure.\n<\/p>\n<p>It is intimated that after investigation of this case, two charge sheets<br \/>\nand two complaints under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 have been<br \/>\nfiled in the Court of CMM, Delhi and presently the case is pending<br \/>\ntrial with Shri Brijesh Sethi, Ld. ASJ, Tis Hazari, Delhi who is<br \/>\nhearing the arguments on charge. He is in the process of forming a<br \/>\njudicial opinion whether there is sufficient prima facie evidence or<br \/>\nnot to frame the charges against accused persons. CBI has placed<br \/>\nall the material before the Ld. Judge, who is hearing the arguments.<br \/>\nThis case was registered by CBI on 20.3.2006. For any other<br \/>\ndocuments related to searches conducted by Navy prior to<br \/>\nregistration of this case, the reply may be sought from CPIO, Navy.<br \/>\nA copy of your application has already been sent to naval<br \/>\nauthorities.\n<\/p>\n<p>v)       Details of persons from whom these items were seized<br \/>\n         including his signature on seizure memo on handing<br \/>\n         over the items.\n<\/p>\n<p>It is intimated that after investigation of this case, two charge sheets<br \/>\nand two complaints under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 have been<br \/>\nfiled in the Court of CMM, Delhi and presently the case is pending<br \/>\ntrial with Shri Brijesh Sethi, Ld. ASJ, Tis Hazari, Delhi who is<br \/>\nhearing the arguments on charge. He is in the process of forming a<br \/>\njudicial opinion whether there is sufficient prima facie evidence or<br \/>\nnot to frame the charges against accused persons. CBI has placed<br \/>\nall the material before the Ld. Judge, who is hearing the arguments.<br \/>\nThis case was registered by CBI on 20.3.2006. For any other<br \/>\ndocuments related to searches conducted by Navy prior to<br \/>\nregistration of this case, the reply may be sought from CPIO, Navy.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                   4<\/span><\/p>\n<p> A copy of your application has already been sent to naval<br \/>\nauthorities.\n<\/p>\n<p>vi)      Details of physical sealing of these items including<br \/>\n         description of seals used.\n<\/p>\n<p>It is intimated that after investigation of this case, two charge sheets<br \/>\nand two complaints under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 have been<br \/>\nfiled in the Court of CMM, Delhi and presently the case is pending<br \/>\ntrial with Shri Brijesh Sethi, Ld. ASJ, Tis Hazari, Delhi who is<br \/>\nhearing the arguments on charge. He is in the process of forming a<br \/>\njudicial opinion whether there is sufficient prima facie evidence or<br \/>\nnot to frame the charges against accused persons. CBI has placed<br \/>\nall the material before the Ld. Judge, who is hearing the arguments.<br \/>\nThis case was registered by CBI on 20.3.2006. For any other<br \/>\ndocuments related to searches conducted by Navy prior to<br \/>\nregistration of this case, the reply may be sought from CPIO, Navy.<br \/>\nA copy of your application has already been sent to naval<br \/>\nauthorities.\n<\/p>\n<p>vii)     Details of Electronic forensic experts present during<br \/>\n         seizure of electronic items viz mobile phones,<br \/>\n         computers, pen drives etc.<br \/>\nIt is intimated that after investigation of this case, two charge sheets<br \/>\nand two complaints under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 have been<br \/>\nfiled in the Court of CMM, Delhi and presently the case is pending<br \/>\ntrial with Shri Brijesh Sethi, Ld. ASJ, Tis Hazari, Delhi who is<br \/>\nhearing the arguments on charge. He is in the process of forming a<br \/>\njudicial opinion whether there is sufficient prima facie evidence or<br \/>\nnot to frame the charges against accused persons. CBI has placed<br \/>\nall the material before the Ld. Judge, who is hearing the arguments.<br \/>\nThis case was registered by CBI on 20.3.2006. For any other<br \/>\ndocuments related to searches conducted by Navy prior to<br \/>\nregistration of this case, the reply may be sought from CPIO, Navy.<br \/>\nA copy of your application has already been sent to naval<br \/>\nauthorities.\n<\/p>\n<p>viii) Details of file structure of hard disk of computer seized<br \/>\n         (so as to rule out fabrication and tempering).<br \/>\nIt is intimated that after investigation of this case, two charge sheets<br \/>\nand two complaints under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 have been<br \/>\nfiled in the Court of CMM, Delhi and presently the case is pending<br \/>\ntrial with Shri Brijesh Sethi, Ld. ASJ, Tis Hazari, Delhi who is<br \/>\nhearing the arguments on charge. He is in the process of forming a<br \/>\njudicial opinion whether there is sufficient prima facie evidence or<br \/>\nnot to frame the charges against accused persons. CBI has placed<br \/>\nall the material before the Ld. Judge, who is hearing the arguments.<br \/>\nThis case was registered by CBI on 20.3.2006. For any other<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                   5<\/span><br \/>\n       documents related to searches conducted by Navy prior to<br \/>\n      registration of this case, the reply may be sought from CPIO, Navy.<br \/>\n      A copy of your application has already been sent to naval<br \/>\n      authorities.\n<\/p>\n<p>      ix)      Details of digital signatures and hash function value of<br \/>\n               electronic items seized.\n<\/p>\n<p>      It is intimated that after investigation of this case, two charge sheets<br \/>\n      and two complaints under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 have been<br \/>\n      filed in the Court of CMM, Delhi and presently the case is pending<br \/>\n      trial with Shri Brijesh Sethi, Ld. ASJ, Tis Hazari, Delhi who is<br \/>\n      hearing the arguments on charge. He is in the process of forming a<br \/>\n      judicial opinion whether there is sufficient prima facie evidence or<br \/>\n      not to frame the charges against accused persons. CBI has placed<br \/>\n      all the material before the Ld. Judge, who is hearing the arguments.<br \/>\n      This case was registered by CBI on 20.3.2006. For any other<br \/>\n      documents related to searches conducted by Navy prior to<br \/>\n      registration of this case, the reply may be sought from CPIO, Navy.<br \/>\n      A copy of your application has already been sent to naval<br \/>\n      authorities.\n<\/p>\n<p>      x)       Any other documents\/ evidence in support of seizure<br \/>\n               made.\n<\/p>\n<p>      It is intimated that after investigation of this case, two charge sheets<br \/>\n      and two complaints under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 have been<br \/>\n      filed in the Court of CMM, Delhi and presently the case is pending<br \/>\n      trial with Shri Brijesh Sethi, Ld. ASJ, Tis Hazari, Delhi who is<br \/>\n      hearing the arguments on charge. He is in the process of forming a<br \/>\n      judicial opinion whether there is sufficient prima facie evidence or<br \/>\n      not to frame the charges against accused persons. CBI has placed<br \/>\n      all the material before the Ld. Judge, who is hearing the arguments.<br \/>\n      This case was registered by CBI on 20.3.2006. For any other<br \/>\n      documents related to searches conducted by Navy prior to<br \/>\n      registration of this case, the reply may be sought from CPIO, Navy.<br \/>\n      A copy of your application has already been sent to naval<br \/>\n      authorities.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>      Nevertheless, on 17.9.09, Shri Rana has moved an appeal before Shri<br \/>\nKamlesh Kumar, Addl. District &amp; Session Judge complaining that &#8220;In this case no<br \/>\nreply has been received even after 35 days.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>      In response, PIO Shri K. S. Rawat, in his letter of 24.9.09 has informed<br \/>\nappellant Shri Rana that the original application of 11.8.09 was treated as an<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         6<\/span><br \/>\n application and not an appeal and was forwarded to the SP, CBI under intimation<br \/>\nto appellant. PIO Shri K. S. Rawat has then provided the following details:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>       &#8220;Vide your letter dated 11.8.2009, you have clearly revealed that all<br \/>\n       documents of the Judicial file have been received by you and no<br \/>\n       information is pending in the court, so the undersigned vide letter<br \/>\n       dated 13.8.2009 transferred the application to the PIO\/<br \/>\n       Superintendent of Police, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi<br \/>\n       for remaining information and you have been requested to contact<br \/>\n       the above said PIO for further correspondence. As no appeal is<br \/>\n       pending before the Ld. First Appellate Authority and so to dispose<br \/>\n       of the same within stipulated period does not arise.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>       Shri Rana has then moved a second appeal before us in which both CBI<br \/>\nand Tees Hazari Courts are impleaded as respondents, in which he has prayed<br \/>\nas follows:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>       &#8220;(a)   Kindly direct CPIO-CBI; ACU-IX to provide information<br \/>\n              sought at para 9 (a) to (g) of the RTI application dated 5th<br \/>\n              Jan 2009.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>       (b)    In exercise of powers vested upon the Commission under<br \/>\n              section 18 (3) clause (a) of the RTI Act, kindly direct<br \/>\n              Superintendent, Central jail No. 3\/ DG (Prisons), Tihar to<br \/>\n              ensure personal appearance of the undersigned at the<br \/>\n              Commission during the hearing of this appeal. It is most<br \/>\n              humbly submitted that the hearing may not be conducted<br \/>\n              through videoconferencing view complexities of the issue,<br \/>\n              no. Of documents to be referred and discussions held on<br \/>\n              18th June 2009 during the earlier hearing at Tihar.<br \/>\n       (c )   Kindly adjudicate the instant appeal expeditiously as the<br \/>\n              same concerns LIFE AND LIBERTY matters and also this<br \/>\n              being the second appeal to CIC concerning the same cause\/<br \/>\n              matter.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>       Subsequently, in a letter of 19.10.09 Shri Rana has made the following<br \/>\nrequest:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>       &#8220;(a)   Kindly hear and adjudicate my appeals against CBI dated 5th<br \/>\n              October, 2009 and 7th September, 2009 at the earliest.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>       (b)    Kindly accord me an opportunity to be personally present for<br \/>\n              the hearing (and not through Video Conference) for a<br \/>\n              meaningful adjudication of the appeals as also in the interest<br \/>\n              of justice.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                        7<\/span><\/p>\n<p>       This request was acceded and a hearing scheduled. In the meantime, on<br \/>\n20.1.&#8217;10 we received a response to the hearing notice from Dr. M. M. Oberoi,<br \/>\nDIG, CBI, New Delhi in which he has submitted as follows:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>      &#8220;a)    It is submitted that CBI has already given a detailed reply to<br \/>\n             the Appeal No. CIC\/WB\/A\/2009\/000609. The same may be<br \/>\n             read as part of this reply also\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      b)     With regard to the averments made in Ground B, it is<br \/>\n             submitted that the direction given by Hon&#8217;ble High Court is to<br \/>\n             be complied with by Ld. Trial Court at the appropriate stage<br \/>\n             of trial. Ld. Trial Court is already seized of the matter. CBI<br \/>\n             is to give clarifications in the court as and when the matter is<br \/>\n             taken up for this cause.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      c)     The averments made in Ground C are denied. CBI has filed<br \/>\n             two charge sheets and two complaints in this matter and<br \/>\n             also filed lists of documents and witnesses. Allegations as<br \/>\n             mentioned in the charge sheet will be proved in the Court of<br \/>\n             law, as per procedure, through the witnesses \/ documents<br \/>\n             cited.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      d)     The averments made in Ground D are denied. The fact of<br \/>\n             the matter is CBI has filed two complaints and two charge<br \/>\n             sheets in this case and the case is pending further<br \/>\n             investigation. In support of the charge sheets filed, CBI has<br \/>\n             cited list of witnesses and relied upon documents. Copies of<br \/>\n             statements of these witnesses and relied upon documents,<br \/>\n             except some classified documents, have been provided to all<br \/>\n             accused persons including the present appellant. The<br \/>\n             matter regarding supply of copies of these classified<br \/>\n             documents is pending before Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court. It is a<br \/>\n             matter of accepted criminal procedure that the prosecution<br \/>\n             proves the allegations of charge sheet with the help of relied<br \/>\n             upon documents \/ statements of witnesses. The appellant is<br \/>\n             asking documents to support particular paragraphs of charge<br \/>\n             sheet. The information in the form of paragraph wise \/<br \/>\n             supporting document \/ statements of witnesses is not<br \/>\n             prepared by the prosecution but it is done for the charge<br \/>\n             sheet as a whole. As such, the information being sought by<br \/>\n             appellant does not come under the definition of information<br \/>\n             under RTI Act 2005.            However, despite this, detailed<br \/>\n             information \/ replies to applications filed by the appellant<br \/>\n             from time to time have been provided.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>      The hearing scheduled for 21.1.10 was then adjourned on appellant&#8217;s<br \/>\nrequest to 5.2.2010, when it was heard. The following are present:\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                        8<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>       Appellant<br \/>\n            Shri Vijendra Rana<br \/>\n            Shri Trideep Pais, Advocate assisting appellant<br \/>\n      Respondents<br \/>\n            Shri K. S. Rawat, PIO, Tees Hazari Courts<br \/>\n            Shri Saryu Kumar, LDC Tees Hazari Courts<br \/>\n            Shri Ashok Sharma, APIO, Tees Hazari Courts<br \/>\n            Shri S. K. Singh, SP, CBI<br \/>\n            Shri D. S. Chauhan, Inspector, CBI<\/p>\n<p>      Shri K. S. Rana, PIL, Tees Hazari Courts submitted that all documents<br \/>\nconnected with charge-sheet that are held by the Court of Addl. District &amp;<br \/>\nSession Judge have been supplied to appellant Shri Rana who has also<br \/>\ninspected the same.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>      Appellant Shri Rana, however, submitted that in Paras 27, 28 &amp; 30 of the<br \/>\ncharge-sheet, there is specific reference to inspection conducted by Naval<br \/>\nAuthorities. However, the documents supplied to him do not give any support to<br \/>\nthis contention and the Naval Authorities when approached have informed him<br \/>\nthat there was no such action taken by the Naval Authorities. Shri S. K. Singh,<br \/>\nSP, CBI on his part submitted that this matter already stands resolved in our<br \/>\ndecision announced on 24.6.09 in File No. CIC\/WB\/A\/2009\/000609, and there<br \/>\nare no further records held by the CBI, which can be provided in this case.\n<\/p>\n<p>      We     have     therefore   revisited   our   decision   in      Appeal   Nos.<br \/>\nCIC\/WB\/A\/2009\/000417 &amp; CIC\/WB\/A\/2009\/000609. In these two cases clubbed<br \/>\ntogether, we have taken the following decision in the latter appeal:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>      &#8220;In the File No. CIC\/WB\/A\/2009\/00609 again Appellate Authority<br \/>\n      Dr. Oberoi has submitted that all such information which could be<br \/>\n      provided has indeed been provided through issue of the charge<br \/>\n      sheet. In this case, however, he has admitted that some information<br \/>\n      being of sensitive nature is being protected by the OSA and has,<br \/>\n      therefore, not been disclosed but is in the possession of the trial<br \/>\n      Court.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      On details of searches however Dr Oberoi has informed appellant<br \/>\n      Shri Rana, &#8220;For searches conducted by Navy prior to registration of<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         9<\/span><br \/>\n          this case, the reply may be sought from CPIO, Navy.&#8221; This is a<br \/>\n         clear statement that CBI holds no information on the subject other<br \/>\n         than that provided by the Navy. Shri Rana has applied to and<br \/>\n         obtained a response from the Navy clearly stating, &#8220;no search was<br \/>\n         conducted at the residence of Commander Vijendra Rana&#8221; as<br \/>\n         quoted, which information he is assuredly free to use in his defence<\/p>\n<p>         From the above it is quite clear that the case now being under<br \/>\n         prosecution, all the information sought by appellant Shri Rana in<br \/>\n         both cases is either in the custody of the Court or if it is not so held,<br \/>\n         will be assumed to not exist. The Public Prosecutors advice to<br \/>\n         appellant Dr. Rana during the hearing that he may obtain<br \/>\n         information from the CBI is misplaced because that agency is no<br \/>\n         longer in control of information that has been submitted to the Court<br \/>\n         to support the prosecution even though it may retain physical<br \/>\n         possession. Access to such information has, therefore, to be<br \/>\n         through the authority by which it is held or in the control of, which in<br \/>\n         this case is the trial Court. This, therefore, is a fit case for transfer<br \/>\n         to the trial court under sub sec. (3) (ii) of Sec. 6 of the RTI Act of<br \/>\n         those questions that concern information no longer under the<br \/>\n         control of CBI and the CPIO of the Trial Court will be required to<br \/>\n         provide a response to appellant Shri Rana within the time<br \/>\n         mandated under the RTI Act 2005. However, in doing so, it is<br \/>\n         expected that the Court will adhere to the requirements of the RTI<br \/>\n         Act 2006, notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith<br \/>\n         contained in the Official Secrets Act 1923, as clearly mandated by<br \/>\n         Sec 22 of the RTI Act. This is specifically clarified because the<br \/>\n         cases for which the information has been sought are being pursued<br \/>\n         under the OSA 1923<\/p>\n<p>         CPIO Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh, SP, CBI, ACU-IX will, therefore,<br \/>\n         now make this transfer within ten working days of the date of<br \/>\n         receipt of this Decision Notice with regard to any questions that<br \/>\n         have remained unanswered in this light, of the two applications of<br \/>\n         appellant Shri Rana&#8221;.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>                              DECISION NOTICE<\/p>\n<p>         From the hearing in the present case, it is quite clear that in fact the orders<br \/>\nof   this Commission have been fully complied with, which would lead to the<br \/>\nconclusion that there is no record in support of Paras 27, 28 &amp; 30 of the charge-<br \/>\nsheet.    Appellant Shri Vijendra Rana invited our attention to his plea before<br \/>\nCPIO, CBI that &#8220;in case there is no document\/evidence in support of conduct of<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                            10<\/span><br \/>\n this search, kindly specify so&#8221;. His single plea before us in the present appeal is<br \/>\nthat this has not been so specified.\n<\/p>\n<p>       In this context, PIO Shri Rawat of Tees Hazari Courts clarified that if there<br \/>\nare no records in support of any item of the charge-sheet, that item cannot be<br \/>\ntaken as proved. Similarly, SP, CBI Shri S. K. Singh has intimated that whatever<br \/>\ninformation is held regarding the subject under discussion has been provided,<br \/>\nwhich is implying that there is no other information held by the CBI on the<br \/>\nsubject.       In our decision in appellant Shri Vijendra Rana&#8217;s Appeal No.<br \/>\nCIC\/WB\/A\/2009\/000609, this Commission has also held that the response of<br \/>\nCPIO CBI &#8220;is a clear statement that CBI holds no information on the subject other<br \/>\nthan that provided by the Navy&#8221;. With the response received from the Naval<br \/>\nAuthorities, which appellant Shri Vijendra Rana claims to have, it is not<br \/>\nunderstood what further clarification of the fact that there are no documents in<br \/>\nsupport of the conduct of the search is required by him, since the fullest<br \/>\ninformation from all three major stakeholders among respondents stands<br \/>\nprovided. The appeal is, therefore, unsustainable and is hereby dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>       Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to<br \/>\nthe parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>(Wajahat Habibullah)<br \/>\nChief Information Commissioner<br \/>\n5.2.2010<\/p>\n<p>Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against<br \/>\napplication and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO<br \/>\nof this Commission.\n<\/p>\n<p>(DC Singh)<br \/>\nAsst. Registrar<br \/>\n5.2.2010<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                        11<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Central Information Commission Shri Vijendra Rana vs Central Bureau Of Investigations &#8230; on 5 February, 2010 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Appeal No. CICWB\/A\/2009\/000958 dated 26.10.2009 Right to Information Act 2005 &#8211; Section 19 Appellant &#8211; Shri Vijendra Rana Respondent &#8211; Central Bureau of Investigations (CBI) Decision announced : 5.2.2010 Facts : By application of 11.8.09 addressed [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[39,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-145070","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-central-information-commission","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Shri Vijendra Rana vs Central Bureau Of Investigations ... on 5 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shri Vijendra Rana vs Central Bureau Of Investigations ... on 5 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-02-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-04-07T14:39:40+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"20 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shri Vijendra Rana vs Central Bureau Of Investigations &#8230; on 5 February, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-07T14:39:40+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010\"},\"wordCount\":4012,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Central Information Commission\",\"Judgements\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010\",\"name\":\"Shri Vijendra Rana vs Central Bureau Of Investigations ... on 5 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-07T14:39:40+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shri Vijendra Rana vs Central Bureau Of Investigations &#8230; on 5 February, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Shri Vijendra Rana vs Central Bureau Of Investigations ... on 5 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shri Vijendra Rana vs Central Bureau Of Investigations ... on 5 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-02-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-04-07T14:39:40+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"20 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shri Vijendra Rana vs Central Bureau Of Investigations &#8230; on 5 February, 2010","datePublished":"2010-02-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-07T14:39:40+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010"},"wordCount":4012,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Central Information Commission","Judgements"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010","name":"Shri Vijendra Rana vs Central Bureau Of Investigations ... on 5 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-02-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-07T14:39:40+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vijendra-rana-vs-central-bureau-of-investigations-on-5-february-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shri Vijendra Rana vs Central Bureau Of Investigations &#8230; on 5 February, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/145070","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=145070"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/145070\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=145070"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=145070"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=145070"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}