{"id":195002,"date":"2008-12-26T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-12-25T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008"},"modified":"2016-11-27T18:18:09","modified_gmt":"2016-11-27T12:48:09","slug":"ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008","title":{"rendered":"Ms. Shama Parveen vs Ministry Of Home Affairs (Mha). on 26 December, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission<\/div>\n
Ms. Shama Parveen vs Ministry Of Home Affairs (Mha). on 26 December, 2008<\/div>\n
                         CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION\n                           Appeal No.CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/01069 dated 14.11.2007\n                              Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19\n\n\nAppellant        -          Ms. Shama Parveen\nRespondent           -      Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA).\n\n\nFacts<\/pre>\n
:\n<\/p>\n
Ms. Shama Parveen of Bijnor (UP) moved three applications of 8.12.06, 29.12.06
\nand 18.1.07 before CPIO Shri I.B. Karan, Director (Delhi), Ministry of Home
\nAffairs, seeking information on a number of points as follows:\n<\/p>\n
APPLICATION OF 8.12.06
\n         “The information needed pertains to my above referenced PMO
\n         order and complaint (Against atrocities committed by Delhi Police),
\n         which is under consideration with the Ministry of Home Affairs, as
\n         per details given below:-\n<\/p>\n
         A)     As regards aforementioned PMO order dated 29.8.2006 and
\n                complaint dated 21.8.2006 provide following information
\n                Para wise:\n<\/p>\n
         i.     Certified copy of Action Taken Report\/ Enquiry Report.
\n         ii.    Certified copies of notings (Sheets) made by concerned
\n                person who have dealt the aforementioned PMO order and
\n                my complaint.\n<\/p>\n
         iii.   Certified copy of statements\/ material submitted by the
\n                Charged Police Officials, conspirator & abettors involved in
\n                said business of false implication.\n<\/p>\n
         iv.    Daily progress report since the date these were received in
\n                MHA and till the date information is provided.
\n         v.     Whether permission for filing complaints with international
\n                agencies has been granted by Hon’ble Prime Minister\/ Home
\n                Secretary (Refer aforementioned complaints, which clearly
\n                shows that officials of Delhi Police have committed atrocities
\n                and that our Government and its agencies have persistently
\n                failed to protect the Basic Fundamental Rights of an ordinary
\n                non-influential family; since last 7 years). If permission has
\n                not been granted reasons for the same may be spelt out.
\n         vi.    Whether MHA called the actual vigilance inquiry reports
\n                conducted by (a) Shri Amarjeet Singh, Ld. ACP\/ Vigilance
\n                and (b) Shri Anil Kumar Sinha, LD. Joint Commissioner of<\/p>\n
                                                1<\/span>
\n         Police\/ Vigilance for examining them. If yes, kindly provide
\n        copy of these enquiry reports.\n<\/p>\n
vii.    Whether enquiry\/ investigation of the cases has been made
\n        over to the NHRC\/ CBI to investigate\/ further investigate into
\n        the 7 false cases in question, so as to unearth the truth. If
\n        not, reasons for the same may be spelt out.
\nviii.   What action has been initiated against the concerned police
\n        officials and authorities of Delhi Police who adopted dilatory
\n        tactics and exhibited dereliction of duties and committed
\n        perjury, so as to shield their erring and guilty police officials?
\n        If action has not been taken, reasons for the same may be
\n        spelt out.\n<\/p>\n
ix.     Whether Case(s) have been registered against the erring
\n        and guilty police officials, conspirators and others involved in
\n        the offences is\/ are registered and enquiry\/ investigation of
\n        these cases are made over to the NHRC\/ CBI. If yes
\n        provide full details. If no, reasons for the same may be spelt
\n        out.\n<\/p>\n
x.      Whether any other FIRs are found registered against my
\n        family members besides the 7 FIRs stated in my complaints.
\n        If yes, provide details thereof.\n<\/p>\n
xi.     Provide full details as to what action has been taken to stop
\n        further harassment of my family members (S\/Shri Aftab
\n        Ahmed, Zafaryab Ahmed, Dilshad Ahmed and Shahzad
\n        Ahmed R\/o H. No. 235, Julahan, Behind Jail, Bijnor) through
\n        false implication.\n<\/p>\n
If above referenced PMO order and complaint dated 21.8.2006
\nwere dealt by different persons\/ agencies of MHA in that case
\nkindly provide above cited information separately.\n<\/p>\n
B.      Provide full and complete information as to what action has
\n        been taken regarding the following matters relating to my
\n        aforementioned complaints.        If action regarding these
\n        matters has not been taken reasons and rationale for the
\n        same may be spelt out.\n<\/p>\n
        i)    What action has been taken against the erring and
\n              guilty police officials who have adopted; cash for false
\n              implication torture incarceration humiliation and
\n              harassment like approach and thus has foisted 7 false
\n              cases on my family members after I registered a
\n              dowry case?\n<\/p>\n
        ii)   Whether action should not be taken against the
\n              officials and authorities of Delhi Police who have
\n              failed to take pre-emptive action despite numerous
\n              complaints and representations were made to them<\/p>\n
                                    2<\/span>
\n        well in advance and brought our apprehensions of
\n       likelihood of false implication to their attention in
\n       person vide 154-CP dated 11.7.2002 and on many
\n       other occasions? (Refer Para 3 of my complaint).\n<\/p>\n
iii)   What action has been taken against the concerned
\n       Police officials who are responsible for adopting
\n       dilatory tactics and causing a delay of 3 years in
\n       taking a decision on withdrawing two under trail cases
\n       u\/s 173 (8) Cr. PC as recommended by Shri Amarjeet
\n       Singh, ACP\/ Vigilance vide his enquiry report dated
\n       24.3.2003? Because of this delay on the part of Delhi
\n       Police we had been unnecessarily dragged before the
\n       court and after a lapse of three years i.e. on
\n       10.3.2006 Commissioner of Police, Delhi directed
\n       DCPs North East and Crime and Railways to
\n       withdraw the cases u\/s 173 (8) Cr. PC and thus
\n       petitioners were made to rush to Delhi from Bijnor to
\n       face avoidable trial (Refer Para 4 of the
\n       aforementioned complaint).\n<\/p>\n
(iv)   Why action should not be taken against concerned
\n       police officials of Vigilance Branch for repeatedly
\n       adopting dilatory tactics and thus failing to act on
\n       NHRC repeated directions vide NHRC Notice No.
\n       3341\/30\/2002-2003-WC            and      its   subsequent
\n       proceedings dated 14.6.2004 and 24.2.2005 and thus
\n       defied and frustrated the objective of directions
\n       passed by the NHRC? (Refer Para 5, Annexure P-1
\n       and Annexure P-2 of my complaint).\n<\/p>\n
(v)    What action ahs been taken against the police
\n       officials responsible for inflicting torture on my brother
\n       while in police custody? (Report about said torture
\n       was also called by NHRC this has however not been
\n       filed by the Vigilance Branch deliberately so as to
\n       protect their erring and guilty police officials. (Refer
\n       Para 5 Annexure P-1 and Annexure P-2 of my
\n       complaints.\n<\/p>\n
(vi)   What action has been taken against the Enquiry
\n       Officer (Vigilance Branch) who did not complete
\n       enquiry with in the stipulated time ( three weeks)
\n       entrusted to him by The Commissioner of Police,
\n       Delhi on 12.4.05? (Refer Para 5 of my complaint as
\n       enquiry should have been completed din three weeks
\n       as per Delhi Police’s Norms set for the discharge of
\n       function vide (Section 4(1) (b) (iv), Manual-4 as well
\n       as procedure followed in decision making process
\n       (Section 4 (1) (b) (iii) Manual-3).\n<\/p>\n
                            3<\/span><\/p>\n
       (vii)    What action ahs been taken against concerned
\n               officials of Vigilance Branch for misleading Shri
\n               Gautam Kaul, IPS (“Retd.) Hon’ble Member, Public
\n               Grievances Commission. Govt. of NCT Delhi
\n               regarding moving applications u\/s 173 (8) Cr.PC
\n               before the courts to withdraw the false cases?
\n               (Despite the fact that there is nothing to indicate that
\n               in fact any such application was filed by that date
\n               (23.3.2006). Refer Para 6 of my complaint.\n<\/p>\n
      (viii)   What action has been taken against the officials of
\n               Vigilance Branch for filing misleading and self
\n               contradictory reports vide letter No. F. 24 (1)
\n               W\/03\/2946\/HA CVC\/ Vig dated 28.1.2004 before the
\n               Central Vigilance Commission and vide report No 24
\n               (50)\/Vig.\/03\/10329\/HANR\/Vigilance dated 12.4.2006
\n               before the National Commission for Women (Refer
\n               Para 7 pf complaint, annexure P-4 and Annexure P-\n<\/p>\n
               5).\n<\/p>\n
      (ix)     Out of aforementioned two reports which report is
\n               authentic? (As these two self contradictory reports
\n               have been submitted by Vigilance Branch, Delhi
\n               Police before the CVC and NCW and were are keen
\n               to know which report is realistic and reliable.\n<\/p>\n
      (x)      Whether scientific methods viz Lie Detector test,
\n               Narco Analysis and Brain Mapping have been used in
\n               investigation\/ enquiry of my complaint? (CP Delhi
\n               and Joint CP (Vigilance) Were time and again
\n               requested for using scientific methods to ascertain the
\n               truths as complaints are related to corruption, misuse
\n               of officials’ position and the violation of human rights
\n               by the officials of Delhi Police).\n<\/p>\n
      (xi)     Provide complete information, procedure, policies,
\n               norms and grounds for using said Scientific Methods
\n               in investigation\/ enquiry of the offences in the day to
\n               day functioning in case i) offences offended by
\n               citizens and ii) when offenders are officials of Delhi
\n               Police.\n<\/p>\n
      (xii)    Whether telephone and mobile call records of police
\n               officials associated with the said 7 false cases and
\n               conspirators of the cases have been obtained?\n<\/p>\n
If yes, what action has been initiated against the erring police
\nofficials on the basis of cal records? (C. P. Delhi and Joint CP
\n(Vigilance) were provided all necessary inputs and also on
\n12.4.2005 and 27.10.2005 regarding the same and thus we are
\nkeen to know as to what action ahs been taken.\n<\/p>\n
                                   4<\/span><\/p>\n
 C)    Provide full and complete information as to what action has
\n      been taken regarding the following matters relating to my
\n      aforementioned complaints.      If action regarding these
\n      matters has not been taken reasons and rationale for same
\n      may be spelt out:\n<\/p>\n
I)    Re: Para 8 (1) of my complaint: IFR No. 69\/2002, u\/s
\n      324,336, 341 and 34 IPC dated 25.2.2002 P.S. Nand Nagri,
\n      Dist. North East, Delhi:\n<\/p>\n
a)    What action has been taken against IO, Sanjay Kumar for
\n      implicating my brothers at the instance and in collusion and
\n      league with my husband and in-laws and deliberately filing
\n      charge sheet by ignoring material documents shown and
\n      submitted to him and sent to his superiors and for extracting
\n      Rs. 5000\/-?\n<\/p>\n
b)    Provide copy of Commissioner of Police, Delhi order dated
\n      10.3.2006 directing DCP\/North East to withdraw the
\n      aforementioned case u\/s 173 (8) Cr. P. C. for further
\n      investigation and file appropriate report in the Hon’ble Court.
\n      If said direction was communicated through order sheet
\n      (notings) provide copy of notings.\n<\/p>\n
c)    Provide copies of application moved before the court u\/s 173
\n      (8) Cr. P. C. (As were still facing trail because application
\n      has not been moved so far. That because of dilatory tactics
\n      adopted by Delhi Police my family members have been
\n      made to rush to Delhi and had to face trial unnecessarily).\n<\/p>\n
d)    Provide noting sheets relating to further investigation.\n<\/p>\n
e)    Provide investigation report and daily progress report of
\n      further investigation conducted in pursuance to direction by
\n      the CP Delhi on 10.3.2006.\n<\/p>\n
f)    What action has been taken against the concerned
\n      investigator who deliberately filed self-serving application
\n      before the Hon’ble Court so as to frustrate the objective of
\n      direction passed by the Commissioner of Police, Delhi?\n<\/p>\n
g)    Whether call record of IO, SI Sanjay Kumar and conspirators
\n      of the case has been obtained to ascertain in the truth. If
\n      yes provide the copy of the same. (Necessary inputs were
\n      shown and submitted to CP Delhi, Joint CP (Vigilance) and
\n      Joint CP\/ New Delhi Range).\n<\/p>\n
II)   Re: Para 8 (II) of my complaint: FIR No. 236\/2002, u\/s
\n      452,506,341,307,392,395, 411, 120B, 34 IPC Arms Act
\n      dated 26.6.2002 P. S. Seelampur, Dist, North East Delhi:\n<\/p>\n
A)    What action has been taken against the Police officials
\n      (Local Police, DIU &Crime Branch) who harassed my family<\/p>\n
                                 5<\/span>
\n        members for three years by prolonging investigation of this
\n       case for three years? (Because finally police has to file
\n       untraced report as no case has been made out against my
\n       family members).\n<\/p>\n
B)     What action ahs been taken against the complainant of the
\n       case (conspirator) and witnesses (abettors)? Why these real
\n       culprits could not be brought to the book and police left them
\n       Scot-free by filing an untraced report?\n<\/p>\n
C)     Whether call record of the investigators of this case and
\n       conspirators of the case has been obtained to ascertain in
\n       the truth? If yes provide the copy of the same.\n<\/p>\n
III)   Re: Para 8 (III) of my complaint: FIR No. 151\/2003\/U\/s
\n       363\/341 dated 28.2.2003 PS Seelampur, Dist North East:\n<\/p>\n
a)     What action has been taken against the conspirators and
\n       abettors of this case? While it has come on record that this
\n       false case and two other cases were also registered by them
\n       to harass and humiliate my family members so as to
\n       pressurize us to withdraw dowry case.\n<\/p>\n
b)     Whether call record of the investigator of this case and
\n       conspirators of the case has been obtained to ascertain the
\n       truth. If yes provide the copy of the same.\n<\/p>\n
IV)    Re: Para 8 (IV) of my complaint: FIR No. 712\/2000, U\/s 324,
\n       34 IPC dated 10.8.2002 P. S. Uttam Nagar, Dist. West Delhi.\n<\/p>\n
a)     What action has been taken against IO HC Shri Raj Singh
\n       Dhankutt for implicating my father and brothers in collusion
\n       and league with concubine of my husband and in-laws and
\n       deliberately filing charge sheet by ignoring material
\n       documents shown and submitted to him and sent to his
\n       superior officers through registered mail and extracting Rs.
\n       6000\/-?\n<\/p>\n
b)     Provide copy of document which his showing that thi8s FIR
\n       was registered u\/s 156 (3) Cr. PC in pursuance to the
\n       direction passed by Hon’ble Court.\n<\/p>\n
c)     Why this case was not withdrawn u\/s 173 (8) Cr. PC for
\n       further investigation on the basis of Shri Amarjeet Singh, Ld.
\n       ACP\/ Vigilance enquiry report (concluded in March 2003)
\n       who found this case false and fabricated and recommended
\n       for further investigation u\/s 173 (8) Cr. PC by Crime Branch,
\n       Delhi?\n<\/p>\n
d)     Who was responsible for not taking appropriate action
\n       towards withdrawing this false case as recommended vide
\n       aforementioned enquiry report and thus made us to face<\/p>\n
                                 6<\/span>
\n      avoidable trails till 29.8.2003. (LD. Trail court acquitted)<\/p>\n
e)   Provide copy of documents (Alleged compromise) legitimacy
\n     of which led to a decision not to take action against the
\n     erring and guilty police officials.\n<\/p>\n
V)   Re: Para 8 (V) of my complaint: FIR No. 11\/2003 u\/s 376,
\n     506 IPC, dated 5.1.2003 PS Kotwali, Dist North:\n<\/p>\n
a)   What action has been taken against the complainant,
\n     conspirators and Police officials involved in implicating in this
\n     false rape case?\n<\/p>\n
b)   What action has been taken against the erring police officials
\n     who severely tortured my brother at the behest of our
\n     opponent and made him to suffer incarceration in Tihar Jail
\n     from 22.1.2003 to 29.9.2003 (251 days)? When it has come
\n     on record that my brother blood group is O+ve while medical
\n     report of alleged rape victim disclose that person have A+ve
\n     blood group committed rape?\n<\/p>\n
c)   What action has been taken against IO, SI-Shri Ramesh
\n     Chand Meena, Crime Branch who extracted Rs. 47,500\/-
\n     from my father?\n<\/p>\n
d)   What action ahs been taken by DCP\/ Crime and Railways to
\n     move application before the Hon’ble court u\/s 173 (8) Cr. PC
\n     for further investigation of the case and file appropriate
\n     report in the court on the direction passed by the
\n     Commissioner of Police, Delhi on 10.3.2006? (as we are still
\n     facing trail because application ahs not been moved so far.
\n     That because of dilatory tactics adopted by Delhi Police my
\n     family members have been made to rush to Delhi and had to
\n     face trial unnecessarily).\n<\/p>\n
e)   Provide copy of Commissioner of Police, Delhi order dated
\n     10.3.2006 directing DCP\/ Crime and Railway to withdraw the
\n     aforementioned case u\/s 173 (8) Cr. PC for furthe4r
\n     investigation and file appropriate report in the Hon’ble Court.
\n     If said direction was communicated through order sheet
\n     (notings) provide copy of notings.\n<\/p>\n
f)   Provide copies of application moved before the Hon’ble
\n     Court u\/s 173 (8) Cr. PC.\n<\/p>\n
g)   Provide investigation report and daily progress report of
\n     further investigation conducted in pursuance to direction
\n     passed by the C. P. Delhi on 10.3.2006.\n<\/p>\n
h)   Whether call record of IO, SI Shri Ramesh Chand Meena
\n     and other police officials and conspirators of the case has
\n     been obtained to ascertain the truth. If yes provide the copy
\n     of same. (Necessary inputs were shown and submitted to
\n     CP Delhi, Joint CP (Vigilance) and Joint CP\/ Crime).\n<\/p>\n
                                 7<\/span><\/p>\n
 VI)    Re: Para 8 (VI) of my complaint: FIR No. 52\/2003 u\/s
\n       341,506, 34 IPC dated 28.2.2003 PS :Civil Lines Dist North:\n<\/p>\n
a)     What action ahs been taken against the conspirators and
\n       abettors of this false case whose name has come on record
\n       in police investigation itself as no evidence could be found to
\n       support the allegations of complainant?\n<\/p>\n
b)     What action ahs been taken against the police officials
\n       involved in lodging this false FIR?\n<\/p>\n
c)     Whether call record of the investigators of this case and
\n       conspirators of the case has been obtained to ascertain the
\n       truth? If yes provide the copy of the same.\n<\/p>\n
VII)   Re: Para 8 (VII) of my complaint; No Nil\/2004 u\/s 420\/379
\n       and 506 IPC dated 7.9.2004 PS: Uttam Nagar, Dist: West
\n       Delhi;\n<\/p>\n
a)     What is status of the investigation of this case? Provide
\n       enquiry report.\n<\/p>\n
D)     Seeking full and complete information regarding process,
\n       procedures and policies of Ministry of Home Affairs,
\n       government of India in the following matters.\n<\/p>\n
i)     Information\/ procedure\/ norms and grounds for granting
\n       ‘immediate’ interim relief’\/ compensation on account of
\n       injury\/ loss which the victims or the members of the family
\n       have suffered owing to the violation of human rights by
\n       public servants.\n<\/p>\n
ii)    Whether Ministry is considering to grant ‘immediate interim
\n       relief’\/ compensation in view of the peculiar circumstances in
\n       which Delhi Police placed the petitioner’s family by
\n       implicating in seven false cases in defiance to order passed
\n       by the NHRC in case file no. 37638\/24\/2001-2002 directed
\n       the Commissioner of Police, Delhi for taking pre-emptive
\n       action against the threat of false implication. Gist of the
\n       plight and suffering undergone by my family is given in my
\n       complaints. (Petitioner entire family suffered financially,
\n       mentally social irreparable losses because of implication in 7
\n       false and frivolous cases and had been humiliated in the
\n       eyes of the public as they have been unnecessarily arrested
\n       repeatedly i.e. in case FIR No. 712\/2000\/ 69\/2002 and while
\n       in police custody in case FIR No. 11\/2003 was subjected to
\n       3rd degree torture and had to suffer incarceration from
\n       22.1.2003 to 29.9.2003 (215 days) and have been harassed
\n       because in other cases Delhi Police grilled them frequently,
\n       which resulted in a loss of their reputation apart from the
\n       ignominy and damage to their health in addition to the<\/p>\n
                                  8<\/span>
\n             considerable expenditure incurred by them to defend
\n            themselves from the repeated false accusations and
\n            frequently rushing to Delhi from Bijnor. The victims of false
\n            implication have been dragged before the courts under the
\n            serious charges because of faulty\/ shoddy investigation
\n            reports filed by the investigators of Delhi Police in
\n            connivance with the erring and guilty police officials and
\n            plotter of the cases.          Despite there was a clear
\n            recommendation (since March 2003) by Ld. ACP\/ Vigilance
\n            for further investigation\/ reinvestigation of all the cases u\/s
\n            173 (8) Cr. PC. However Commissioner of Police, Delhi
\n            passed order of reinvestigation on 10.3.2006 after a lapse of
\n            three years and thus made to suffer to face avoidable trails
\n            in different courts).\n<\/p>\n
     iii)   Information\/ procedure\/ norms and grounds on the basis of
\n            which M\/o Home Affairs assigned the investigation\/ enquiry
\n            of the complaints of corruption and human rights violations to
\n            the CBI and utilize the services of any officer or investigation
\n            agency of the Central Government or any State
\n            Government.\n<\/p>\n
     iv)    The rationale and the reasons for not transferring the
\n            investigation of the cases to CBI for which numerous
\n            requests have been made since beginning.\n<\/p>\n
     E)     Information\/ procedure for filing a complaint with
\n            international agencies like “UNHRC” Amnesty International
\n            etc. I request to either provide the required information or
\n            transfer this application to concerned department\/
\n            organization, which can provide me with the required
\n            information.\n<\/p>\n
APPLICATION OF 29.12.06
\n     “The information needed pertains to my following complaints under
\n     consideration with Ministry of Home Affairs, as per details given
\n     below:\n<\/p>\n
     i)     PMO ID No. 24\/03\/2006-PMP-1\/229045 dated 29.8.06
\n            addressed to the Home Secretary, M.H.A.\n<\/p>\n
     ii)    My grievance petition dated 21.8.06 addressed to Home
\n            Secretary, MHA\n<\/p>\n
            a)    Whether MHA has taken any action on my above
\n                  referenced complaints?\n<\/p>\n
            b)    If yes, please provide copies of the entire file and
\n                  other related documents, records, memos, file<\/p>\n
                                       9<\/span>
\n                  notings, log books, etc. that have been generated as
\n                 a result.\n<\/p>\n
           c)    Please provide me a Daily Progress Report on the
\n                 matter from the date of receiving complaint up to the
\n                 date of supplying the information. This should include
\n                 a summary of the movement of the file\/matter along
\n                 with the dates, name and designation of the person \/
\n                 officials handling my case and the details of which
\n                 officer did what on what date.\n<\/p>\n
           d)    If no action has been taken, please provide the
\n                 reasons.”\n<\/p>\n
APPLICATION OF 18.1.07
\n     “A)   The information needed pertains to below cited two vigilance
\n           enquiries conducted on our complaints and furnishing
\n           clinching material documents including mobile and phone
\n           numbers of police officials and accused in dowry case
\n           showing nexus between them. Although we are r\/o Bijnor
\n           (U.P) however, we extended utmost cooperation to the
\n           Enquiry Officers and time and again rushed to Delhi so as to
\n           reply\/satisfy their queries and also shown and submitted
\n           material documents to them and the Commissioner of
\n           Police, Delhi.\n<\/p>\n
           a)     Shri Amarjeet Singh, Ld. ACP\/Vigilance conducted
\n                  enquiry in the year 2003 about implication in 5 false
\n                  cases and\n<\/p>\n
           b)     Shri Anil Kumar Sinha Ld. Joint Commissioner of
\n                  Police\/Vigilance conducted enquiry in the year 2005
\n                  about implication in 7 false cases.\n<\/p>\n
           i)    As regards (a) and (b) please provide certified copies
\n                 of the entire files and other related documents,
\n                 records, memos, file notings, log books, statements of
\n                 the erring police officials and plotters of these cases.
\n                 Telephone and Mobile call records of erring police
\n                 officials and plotters of the said 7 cases etc. that have
\n                 been generated as a result of the aforementioned
\n                 enquiries.\n<\/p>\n
           ii)   Please provide me a Daily Progress Report on the
\n                 aforementioned enquiries from the date of complaint \/
\n                 enquiry up to the date of supplying the information.
\n                 This should include a summary of the movement of
\n                 the files\/matter along with the dates, name and
\n                 designation of the persons \/ officials dealt the<\/p>\n
                                     10<\/span>
\n         aforementioned enquiry files and the details of which
\n        officer did what on what date.\n<\/p>\n
iii)    Please provide case wise information about the said 7
\n        cases as to what action would be taken against the
\n        erring and guilty police officials (and plotters of the
\n        false cases) for extracting money from us, inflicting
\n        torture, victimizing my family members through
\n        implicating them in 7 false and frivolous cases and
\n        thus caused financial, mental, social irreparable
\n        losses and humiliation to my entire family? By when
\n        that action would be taken?\n<\/p>\n
iv)     If no action would be taken against erring police
\n        officials and plotters of the said 7 cases and or they
\n        have been given clean chit in said enquiries, please
\n        provide case wise and name wise reasons and
\n        rationale of the Enquiry Officers and the
\n        Commissioner of Police, Delhi for doing so viz.
\n        leaving them scot-free?\n<\/p>\n
v)      On what basis investigation of 3 cases viz. 1) FIR No.
\n        236 PS Seelampur, Distt. North East, 2) FIR No.
\n        52\/2003 PS Civil Lines, Distt. North and 3) FIR No.
\n        11\/2003 PS Kotwali, Distt. North was transferred to
\n        the Crime Branch?\n<\/p>\n
vi)     Please provide entire records including file notings
\n        that have been generated in transferring the
\n        investigation of aforesaid 3 cases to the Crime
\n        Branch.\n<\/p>\n
vii)    On what basis the Commissioner of Police, Delhi
\n        passed order dt. 10.3.2006 viz directed DCPs\/North
\n        East and Crime and Railways to withdraw the under
\n        trial two cases viz. FIR No. 69\/2002 PS Nand Nagri,
\n        Distt. North East and F.I.R. No. 11\/2003 PS Kotwali,
\n        Distt. North u\/s 173(8)CrPC from the Court?\n<\/p>\n
viii)   Please provide entire records order including noting
\n        sheets related to the Commissioner of Police, Delhi
\n        order dt. 10.3.2006.\n<\/p>\n
ix)     Reasons and rationale for not withdrawing the under
\n        trial case FIR No. 712\/2000 u\/s 324, 34 IPC Dt.
\n        10.8.2000 PS Uttam Nagar, Distt. West Delhi u\/s
\n        173(8) CrPC for further investigation as per findings of
\n        vigilance enquiry report submitted by Shri Amarjeet
\n        Singh Ld. ACP\/Vigilance in March, 2003.\n<\/p>\n
x)      Please give the names and designations of the
\n        officials who were supposed to take action on the
\n        findings of the aforementioned vigilance enquiry
\n        reports?\n<\/p>\n
                           11<\/span><\/p>\n
             xi)    What action would be taken against these officials for
\n                   not doing their work and thereby compelled to face
\n                   avoidable trails in different courts and thus causing
\n                   mental, social and financial harassment to us? By
\n                   when would that action be taken?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       B)    Please provide following information (I to vi) regarding the
\n             complaints and representations listed in the table cited
\n             below:\n<\/p>\n
             i)     Whether Vigilance Branch, Delhi Police has taken any
\n                    action on the complaints\/ representations mentioned
\n                    in the table cited below?\n<\/p>\n
             ii)    IF yes, please provide information on each of the said
\n                    complaints\/ presentations. Please provide copies of
\n                    the entire file and other related documents, records,
\n                    memos, file notings, log books, telephone and mobile
\n                    call records etc that have been generated as a result
\n                    of these complaints\/ representations.\n<\/p>\n
             iii)   Please provide me a Daily Progress Report on each
\n                    of the complaints\/ representations form the date of
\n                    receiving complaint up to the date of supplying the
\n                    information. This should include a summary of the
\n                    movement of the file\/ matter along with the dates,
\n                    name and designation of the person\/ officials handling
\n                    (Dealt) these complaints and the details of which
\n                    officer did what on what date.\n<\/p>\n
             iv)    If no action has been taken, please provide the
\n                    reasons.\n<\/p>\n
             v)     If call records of telephone and mobile numbers
\n                    furnished along with were not taken, pleas provide the
\n                    reasons.\n<\/p>\n
             vi)    If any of the above complaint\/ representation was
\n                    forwarded to any other Unit\/ Branch of Delhi Police,
\n                    please provide the reasons and rationale.
\nDate   Particulars of complaints\/ Representations (submitted Date          of
\n       by my father and brothers S\/Shri Aftab Ahmed, Dilshad complaint\/
\n       Ahmed, Shahzad Ahmed and by me Smt. Shama representation
\n       Parveen)\n<\/p>\n
1.     Complaint along with material documents shown and 25.4.2005
\n       submitted to the Joint CP\/ Vigilance\n<\/p>\n
2.     Complaint along with material documents shown and 25.5.2005
\n       submitted to the Joint CP\/ Vigilance\n<\/p>\n
3.     Complaint along with material documents furnished 8.6.2005
\n       before the Joint CP\/ Vigilance.\n<\/p>\n
4.     Complaint along with material documents furnished 16.6.2005
\n       before the Joint CP\/ Vigilance<\/p>\n
                                      12<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
 5.    Complaint along with material document furnished            17.6.2005
\n      before the Joint CP\/ Vigilance\n<\/p>\n
6.    Complaint along with material documents furnished           24.9.2005
\n      before the Joint CP\/ Vigilance\n<\/p>\n
7.    Complaint along with material documents furnished           27.10.2005
\n      before the Joint CP\/ Vigilance\n<\/p>\n
8.    Complaint against Shri R. C. Mina, SI Crime Branch          9.4.2005
\n      regarding shoddy\/ faulty investigation and demand of
\n      huge bribe, shown and submitted to the Joint CP\/
\n      Vigilance.\n<\/p>\n
9.    Complaint against Shri R. C. Mina, SI Crime Branch          24.4.2003
\n      regarding shoddy\/ faulty investigation and demand of
\n      huge bribe shown and submitted to the Joint CP\/
\n      Vigilance.\n<\/p>\n
10.   Complaint against Shri R. C. Mina, SI Crime Branch          12.5.2003
\n      regarding shoddy\/ faulty investigation and demand of
\n      huge bribe shown and submitted to the Joint CP\/
\n      Vigilance.<\/p>\n
\n11.   E-mail to the Commissioner of Police, Delhi                 22.12.2006\n12.   The Commissioner of Police, Delhi.                          30.10.2006\n13.   The Commissioner of Police, Delhi.                          5.9.2006\n14.   The Joint CP\/ Vigilance                                     5.9.2006\n15.   The Commissioner of Police, Delhi.                          27.12.2006\n16.   The DCP\/ Vigilance                                          13.12.2006\n17.   Sp. CP\/ Vigilance                                           27.12.2006\n18.   The Commissioner of Police, Delhi.                          27.12.2006\n19.   The Commissioner of Police, Delhi.                          30.10.2006\n20.   Request letter to the Joint CP\/ Vigilance\/                  3.4.2006\n21.   Central Vigilance Commission vide its order No. 003-        29.6.2006\n<\/pre>\n
      DLH-010\/28505 dated 29.6.2006 had sent our
\n      complaint to the Joint CP\/ Vigilance for appropriate
\n      action and needful justice in the matter.\n<\/p>\n
22.   On 3.6.2003 a complaint along with a Medical                3.6.2003
\n      Certificate of medical examination conducted while in
\n      police custody clearly shown injuries suffered due to 3rd
\n      degree torture inflicted on my brother Shri Dilshad
\n      Ahmed while in police custody in false case No. FIR No.
\n      11\/2003 u\/s 376,506 IPC, PS Kotwali, Dist North was
\n      shown and submitted to the then Joint CP\/ Vigilance.\n<\/p>\n
      It was specifically submitted vide said complaint to take
\n      prints out of incoming and out going call log of mobile
\n      no. 9811865516 so as to confirm nexus between the
\n      police officials and plotter of the cases and to bring the
\n      erring and guilty police officials and other to justice.\n<\/p>\n
23.   NHRC Notice No. 3341\/30\/2002-2003-WC                       7.2.2003<\/p>\n
                                      13<\/span>
\n C)   In pursuance to Central Vigilance Commission’s direction
\n     Addl. DCP\/ Vigilance had filed a report vide letter No. F. 24
\n     (1) W\/03\/2946\/HA-CVC\/Vig.\n<\/p>\n
     i)    Please provide certified copies of the entire files and
\n           other related documents, records, memos, file
\n           notings, log books, statements of the erring police
\n           officials and plotters of these cases. Telephone and
\n           Mobile call records of erring police officials and
\n           plotters of the said 7 cases etc that have been
\n           generated as a result of enquiry conducted for
\n           furnishing aforementioned reply before the CVC.\n<\/p>\n
     ii)   Please provide me a Daily Progress REpor5t on the
\n           aforementioned enquires from the date of complaint\/
\n           enquiry up to the date of supplying the information.
\n           This should include a summary of the movement of
\n           the file\/ matter along with the dates, name and
\n           designation of the person\/ officials dealt my case and
\n           the details of which officer did what on what date.\n<\/p>\n
D)   On 30.11.2005 my brother Shri Shahzad Ahmed had sent a
\n     complaint along with material documents to the Joint CP\/
\n     Vigilance requesting enquiry against erring and guilty police
\n     officials named in the complaint. I came to know that instead
\n     of enquiring into the complaint, this complaint was merely
\n     forwarded to the DCP\/ North West. When the complaint was
\n     made against officials of Crime Branch, North East and
\n     North.\n<\/p>\n
     i)       Please provide reasons and rationale for forwarding
\n             the said complaint to the DCP\/ North West. How
\n             DCP\/ North West comes into picture?\n<\/p>\n
     ii)     Please give the names and designations of the
\n             officials who were supposed to take action on said
\n             complaint and who have not done so? So as to
\n             protect their erring and guiltily police officials and in
\n             this way erring police officials they were given
\n             opportunity to destroy the evidences furnished in the
\n             complaint and hence subverted the justice.\n<\/p>\n
     iii)    What action would be taken against these officials for
\n             no doing their work and exhibiting aphetic approach
\n             towards the citizen’s complaints? By when would that
\n             action be taken?\n<\/p>\n
E)   Re: Case No. PGC\/2005.174\/33 DP: Non compliance of
\n     order\/ direction passed by Shri Gautam Kaul, IPS (Retd)<\/p>\n
                                14<\/span>
\n               Hon’ble Member, Public Grievances Commission vide
\n              PGC’s proceedings dated 3.2.2006 and 23.3.2006.\n<\/p>\n
       Shri B. M. Sharma, Deputy Secretary, PGC vide order\/ direction
\n       letter F. No. PGC\/ 2006\/174\/200 11185 dated 20.9.2006 called
\n       comments from Joints Commissioner of Police\/ Vigilance on the
\n       subject matter.\n<\/p>\n
              i)    Please provide certified copies of the entire file and
\n                    other related documents\/ records, memos, file
\n                    notings, log books that have been generated as a
\n                    result of aforementioned order of the PGC.\n<\/p>\n
              ii)   If no reply has been filed, please provide the reasons.\n<\/p>\n
       F)     Regarding President’s Secretariat UD No. E-6\/US
\n              (P)\/09\/2006 dated 15.9.2006 and Deputy Secretary (Home)
\n              Letter No. F. 14\/77\/2006\/HP-II\/7246 dated 20.10.2006
\n              (complaint was against officials and authorities of Delhi
\n              Police viz Vigilance Branch, Crime Branch, Distt North East,
\n              Distt West and Distt North.\n<\/p>\n
              i)     Please provide certified copies of the entire files and
\n                     other related documents, records, memos, file
\n                     notings, log books etc that have been generated as a
\n                     result of enquiry conducted by Vigilance Branch in
\n                     pursuance to above referenced endorsements.\n<\/p>\n
              ii)    If Vigilance Branch has not conducted enquiry, please
\n                     provide reasons and rationale of the same.\n<\/p>\n
              iii)   Please provide reasons and rationale of O\/o CP Delhi
\n                     and Vigilance Branch for forwarding the complaint to
\n                     DCP\/ North East (only) when complaint was against
\n                     officials and authorities of Vigilance Branch, Crime
\n                     Branch, Distt North east, Distt West and Distt North.”\n<\/p>\n
       These applications were all passed on to the Office of Dy. Commissioner
\nof Police (Vigilance) Delhi, which were respectively received on 15.12.06,
\n19.1.07 and 22.1.07.    The response Ms Parveen received to her request of
\n8.12.06 from Ms. Shalini Singh, PIO and DCP (Vigilance) was simply that the
\nmatter was under examination. However, after she has moved a first appeal on
\n17.2.07, a detailed response was received from Shri M.R. Gothwal, PIO & DCP
\n(Vig) as follows:\n<\/p>\n
       “The said complaints were examined in this office and a reply in
\n       detail was sent to the Under Secretary to the GOI, MHA, New Delhi<\/p>\n
                                        15<\/span>
\n        vide No. 10131\/HA-MHA\/Vig. Dated 20.3.2007. Copy of the same
\n       is enclosed herewith for your information.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Upon this Ms Parveen moved another first appeal on 14.4.07 before Shri
\nR.P. Upadhyaya Addl. Commissioner of Police (Vigilance) on the grounds that
\n“the information provided is vague and not in line with the information sought
\npoint wise\/ Para wise I am therefore constrained to appeal to you for the required
\ninformation” which, however, was dismissed by Appellate Authority Shri R.P.
\nUpadhyaya on 8.5.07 in the following words:\n<\/p>\n
       “As per the records, in his order dated 22.3.2007, PIO\/ Vigilance
\n       has sent to you a copy of a detailed reply sent by him to Under
\n       Secretary to the GOI, MHA, New Delhi vide no. 10131\/HA-MHA\/Vig
\n       dated 20.3.2007. This is a very comprehensive reply and has all
\n       the information asked for by you in your appl8ication from time to
\n       time. There has been no effort to withhold any information from
\n       you. All the information concerning the Vigilance Branch has been
\n       provided. There is no ground in the appeal to interfere with the
\n       orders of PIO\/ Vigilance.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     On not receiving a response on the application of 29.12.06 Ms. Shama
\nParveen moved a first appeal of 17.2.07 before Addl. Commissioner of Police
\n(Vigilance) who in his order of 1.6.07 stated as follows:\n<\/p>\n
       “A copy of the detailed reply was also sent to you by PIO\/Vig. Vide
\n       No. 10265\/RTI\/Vig dated 22.3.07. But you have stated in your
\n       appeal that you have not received any response from PIO\/Vig. A
\n       copy of the report is again being sent to you. I hope this will answer
\n       all your queries.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     The Appellate Authority has, therefore, considered the PIO’s response to
\nthe application of 8.12.06 as the full response.\n<\/p>\n
     Finally, in her request of 18.1.07 Ms. Shama Parveen received a more
\ndetailed response from Ms. Shalini Singh PIO (Vig.)         seeking to answer all
\nquestions as follows:\n<\/p>\n
       “A     The copy of Vigilance enquiry conducted by Shri Amarjit
\n              Singh, ACP\/Vig. has already been sent to you vide this office
\n              No. 27773\/RTI\/Vig. Dated 15.9.2006. However, a copy of
\n              the same and a copy of the details of the scrutiny of<\/p>\n
                                         16<\/span>
\n       Vigilance enquiry report conducted by the then Jt.
\n      CP\/Vigilance Shri A. K. Sinha is enclosed. On the basis of
\n      Vigilance Enquiry report the investigation of case FIR No.
\n      236 PS Seelampur, East Distt. FIR No. 52\/03 PS Civil Lines,
\n      North Distt. & FIR No. 11\/33 PS Kotwali, North Distt. were
\n      transferred to Crime Branch (copy of letter enclosed). On
\n      recommendation of PGC after approval of CP, Delhi, DCPs
\n      North East Distt. & Crime & Railways filed applications u\/s
\n      173(3) Cr.P.C. in the concerned courts in case FIR No.
\n      69\/02 P.S. Nand Nagri and 11\/03 P.S. Kotwali respectively.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Rest of the information as asked for cannot be furnished to you as
\nper Sec. 8(1)(e)(g) of RTI Act, 2005 as these persons have had
\nthere depositions recorded in good faith and in confidence during
\nthe course of enquiry. The identities of such citizens who
\ncooperate with the law enforcement authorities need to be
\nprotected, as was held by CIC in the case of Vinod Kr. Sharma vs.
\nDelhi Police in case File No. CIC\/AT\/A\/2006\/00373 dated
\n23.11.2006<\/p>\n
B.  Remarks may be seen on complaint \/ representation filed by
\n    you. Shahzad Ahmed & Aftab Ahmed:-\n<\/p>\n
Sr. Particulars        of    Date   of             Remarks.\nNo. Complaint                complaint\n    \/representation\n    submitted by Sh.\n    Aftab         Ahmed,\n    Shahzad       Ahmed,\n    Shama Parveen\n1   Complaint along with 25.4.05        Complaint        sent        to\n    material      document              DCP\/West         vide     No.\n    shown and submitted to              14985\/HA-SR dt. 7.5.05\n    Jt. CP\/Vig.\n2   Complaint along with 25.5.05        Not received in this office.\n    material      document\n    shown and submitted to\n    Jt. CP\/Vig.\n3   Complaint along with 8.6.05         Complaint sent to DCP\n    material      document              West Distt. vide No.\n    furnished   before   Jt.            20166\/HA-SR dt. 20.6.05.\n    CP\/Vig.\n4   Complaint along with 16.6.05        Sent to DCP\/North-East\n    material      document              Distt.       vide         No.\n    furnished   before   Jt.            20711\/HA\/NDR\/Vig.          Dt.\n    CP\/Vig.                             24.6.05 for n.a.\n\n\n                               17<\/span>\n 5.   Complaint along with           17.6.05    Sent to DCP\/North-East\n     material         document                 Distt.       vide         No.\n     furnished     before    Jt.               20711\/HA\/NDR\/Vig.          Dt.\n     CP\/Vig.                                   24.6.05 for n.a.\n6    Complaint along with           24.9.05    Not received in this office.\n     material         document\n     furnished     before    Jt.\n     CP\/Vig.\n7    Complaint along with           27.10.05   Complaint    sent       to\n     material         document                 DCP\/West Distt. vide No.\n     furnished     before    Jt.               35385 HR-SR dt. 10.11.05\n     CP\/Vig.\n8    Complaint against Sh.          9.4.05     Not received in this office.\n     R.C. Meena SI Crime\n     Branch           regarding\n     shoddy\/faulty\n     investigation         and\n     demand of huge bribe,\n     shown and submitted to\n     Jt. CrP\/Vig.\n9    Complaint against Sh.          24.3.03    Not received in this office.\n     R.C. Meena SI Crime\n     Branch           regarding\n     shoddy\/faulty\n     investigation         and\n     demand of huge bribe,\n     shown and submitted to\n     Jt. CrP\/Vig.\n10   Complaint against Sh.          12.5.03    Not received in this office.\n     R.C. Meena SI Crime\n     Branch           regarding\n     shoddy\/faulty\n     investigation         and\n     demand of huge bribe,\n     shown and submitted to\n     Jt. CrP\/Vig.\n11   E-mail to Commissioner         22.12.06   Complaint had become the\n     of Police, Delhi                          part of Vigilance Enquiry\n12   The Commissioner of            30.10.06   This complaint\/application\n     Police, Delhi.                            was not received from O\/O\n                                               CP Delhi the same has\n                                               been       received     from\n                                               Addl.CP\/HQs and reply has\n                                               been sent to you vide No.\n                                               32531\/RTI\/Vig. Dt. 8.11.06\n13   The   Commissioner       of 5.9.06        Complaint had become the\n\n\n                                   18<\/span>\n      Police, Delhi.                        part of Vigilance Enquiry\n14   The Jt. CP\/Vig.            5.9.06     Complaint had become the\n                                           part of Vigilance Enquiry\n15   The Commissioner       of 27.12.06    Complaint had become the\n     Police, Delhi.                        part of Vigilance Enquiry\n16   DCP\/Vig.                   13.12.06   Complaint had become the\n                                           part of Vigilance Enquiry\n17   Spl.CP\/Vig.                27.12.06   Complaint had become the\n                                           part of Vigilance Enquiry\n18   The Commissioner       of 27.12.06    Complaint had become the\n     Police, Delhi.                        part of Vigilance Enquiry\n19   The Commissioner       of 30.10.06    This complaint\/application\n     Police, Delhi.                        was not received from O\/O\n                                           CP Delhi the same has\n                                           been       received     from\n                                           Addl.CP\/HQs and reply has\n                                           been sent to you vide No.\n                                           32531\/RTI\/Vig. Dt. 8.11.06\n20   Request                   to 3.4.06   Complaint had become the\n     Jt.CP\/Vigilance                       part of Vigilance Enquiry\n21   Central           Vigilance 29.6.06   Reply sent to you vide this\n     Commission vide its                   Office No. 27773\/RTI Vig.\n     order No. 003-DLH-                    Dt. 15.9.06\n     010\/28505 dt. 29.6.06\n     had sent their complaint\n     to      the      Jt.CP\/Vig.\n     Appropriate action and\n     needful \/ justice in the\n     matter.\n22   On 3.6.03 a complaint 3.6.03          Not received in this office.\n     along with a medical\n     certificate of medical\n     examination conducted\n     in Police Custody clearly\n     showing injuries suffered\n     due to third degree\n     torture inflicted on your\n     brother     Sh.     Dilshad\n     Ahmed while in police\n     custody in false case\n     number FIR No. 11\/03\n     u\/s 376, 506 IPC PS\n     Kotwali, North Distt. was\n     shown and submitted to\n     the         then         Jt.\n     CP\/Vigilance.\n\n\n                               19<\/span>\n       It     was      specifically\n      submitted      vide    said\n      complaint to take prints\n      out of incoming and\n      outgoing calls log of\n      mobile No. 9811865516\n      so as to confirm nexus\n      between       the     police\n      officials and plotter of the\n      cases and to bring the\n      erring and guilty police\n      officials and other to\n      justice.\n 23   NHRC        notice      No. 7.2.03      The reply sent to you vide\n      3341\/30\/2002-2003-WC.                   this   office  letter   No.\n                                              13082\/RTI\/Vig.        Dated\n                                              11.5.06               under\n                                              RTI\/Vigilance.\n\nC.    Photo copy of letter No. F.24(1)W\/03\/2946\/ HA\/CVC-Vig.\n<\/pre>\n
      Dated 28.1.2004 is enclosed herewith.\n<\/p>\n
Rest of the information as asked for cannot be provided as per Sec.\n<\/p>\n
      8(1)(e) & (g) of RTI Act as it contains references to peoples,
\n      who gave information or have had their depositions recorded
\n      in good faith and in confidence during the course of enquiry.
\n      The identities of such citizens who cooperate with the law
\n      enforcement authorities needs to be protected as was held
\n      in case of Vinod Kumar vs. Delhi Police by CIC in case File
\n      No. CIC\/AT\/A\/2006\/00373 dated 23.11.2006.\n<\/p>\n
D.    Your brother’s complaint dated 20.11.2005 was sent to
\n      DCP\/North West Distt. as the Crime Branch office was at
\n      that time located at in the building of PS Prashant Vihar
\n      which was in the North West Distt. The same was then sent
\n      by DCP North West Distt. to DCP\/C&R vide his office letter
\n      No. 1381-Complt9NWD) dated 11.2.2006 for further
\n      necessary action.\n<\/p>\n
E.    As per the recommendation of PGC in Para 9 (copy
\n      enclosed), after approval of CP\/Delhi the applications had
\n      been filed u\/s 173(8) CrPC North East Distt. and C&R in the
\n      concerned court. Already a reply was sent in this regard
\n      (copy enclosed) to PGC.\n<\/p>\n
                                20<\/span><\/p>\n
       F.     Reply has already been sent to you vide this office letter No.
\n             34772\/RTI\/Vig. Dated 21.11.2006 under RTI Act. Copy of
\n             same is enclosed.\n<\/p>\n
      Rest of the information as asked for cannot be furnished to you as
\n      per Sec. 8(1)(e)(g) of RTI Act 2005, as these persons have had
\n      their depositions recorded in good faith and in confidence during
\n      the course of enquiry. The identities of such citizens who
\n      cooperate with the law enforcement authorities need to be
\n      protected, as was held by CIC in case of Vinod Kr. Sharma vs.
\n      Delhi Police in case File No. CIC\/AT\/A\/2006\/00373 dated
\n      23.11.2006.”\n<\/p>\n
      However, not satisfied Ms. Shama Parveen moved her first appeal on
\n14.3.07 on the following grounds:\n<\/p>\n
      “the information provided is vague, incomplete and not in line with
\n      the information sought point wise \/ Para wise, I am therefore
\n      constrained to appeal to you for the required information.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
With regard to the withholding of information she specifically pleaded as follows:\n<\/p>\n
      “Since information solicited concerns human rights and corruption,
\n      therefore, information sought cannot be kept confidential, as was
\n      held by CIC in case of Shri Dharmendra Sharma vs. Delhi Police in
\n      case File No. CIC\/AT\/A\/2006\/00535.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      Thus the information sought by the appellant, even if attracting
\n      exemption of Sec. 8(1)(e) or Sec. 8(1)(g) will be governed by the
\n      provision of sec. 8(2), which allows disclosure even protected
\n      information. The Ld. PIO has not reflected on the human rights and
\n      corruption aspects which the applicant has highlighted in RTI
\n      request itself.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      I, therefore, appeal to kindly provide certified copies of entire
\n      information requested vide point No. (i) & (ii).”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      In this appeal appellant has examined in detail the answers received.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
However, in his order of 24.4.07 first appellate authority dismissed the appeal in
\nthe following words:\n<\/p>\n
      “Perusal of record shows that you have been provided a copy of
\n      Vigilance enquiry report of the enquiry conducted by Shri Amarjit
\n      Singh, ACP\/Vig. As well as a copy of details of scrutiny of Vigilance
\n      enquiry report conducted by the then Jt. CP\/Vig. Action taken on<\/p>\n
                                        21<\/span>
\n        the Vigilance enquiry report has also been intimated to you. Your
\n       contention that the information sought by you in subsequent paras
\n       of your application will be governed by section 8(2) of the RTI Act is
\n       untenable. Section 8(2) says “a public authority may allow access
\n       to information, if public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to
\n       the protected interests.” This section does not relate to human
\n       rights or corruption, as claimed by you. Denial of information
\n       sought by you by PIO\/Vig. is justified as this could disclose the
\n       identities of persons who cooperated with the law enforcing
\n       agencies and may jeopardize their safety.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       Your complaints of different dates mentioned in your application
\n       were sent to different PIOs as mentioned in the letter sent to you by
\n       PIO\/Vigilance. The record of the office of Jt. CP\/Vig. Has also been
\n       got checked and your complaints mentioned at Sr. Nos. 2, 6, 8, 9,
\n       10 and 22 have not been received in that office.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       After perusal of all the documents, I am of the opinion that PIO\/Vig.
\n       has provided you all the information that could be provided under
\n       the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     The appeal was heard on 26.12.2008 through video conferencing. The
\nfollowing are present:\n<\/p>\n
       Appellant (AT NIC STUDIO, BIJNOR, U.P.)
\n             Ms. Shama Parveen
\n             Sh. Aftab Ahmad (Father of appellant)
\n             Sh. Shahzad Ahmad (Brother of appellant)
\n       Respondents (AT CIC STUDIO, NEW DELHI)
\n             Sh. Rajesh Kumar, DCP (Vig)
\n             Sh. Krishan Pal HC (Ministerial)<\/p>\n
     Shri Shahzad Ahmad, authorized representative of appellant Ms. Shama
\nParveen submitted that the questions asked were specific and are not all
\nanswered in the enquiry report. Shri Rajesh Kumar, present DCP(V) on the other
\nhand referred to the response given on 22.2.07 in which each of the complaint
\nmoved by appellant have infact been addressed and submitted that the enquiry
\nreport covers the points at issue.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                               DECISION NOTICE<\/p>\n
                                        22<\/span>
\n            Having examined the records and heard the parties, we find that what
\nhas been provided is a certified copy of the action taken report \/ enquiry report
\nwhich accounts for only      question A-1 of the application of 8.12.06.       Other
\nquestions flowing from the same have not been addressed pointwise in any of
\nthe three applications. The RTI Act is specific in sec. 7 sub sec. (9) in requiring
\nthat “An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought
\nunless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or
\nwould be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question”. It
\nwas, therefore, incumbent upon the CPIO to answer each of the questions raised
\nunless he sought to provide the information in a form other than what had been
\nsought but for this good reason had to be given.\n<\/p>\n
      We also find from the reply of 22.2.07 that many of the questions asked
\nhave been referred to different Dy. Commissioners of Police.          Whereas this
\nindeed is the required practice u\/s 6 sub sec. (3) of the RTI Act read with sec. 5
\nsub sec. (4), if the application has been so transferred by the CPIO of the same
\ndepartment it becomes the responsibility of that CPIO to ensure also that replies
\nare given, which has not happened in this case. Besides, in refusing part of the
\ninformation sought CPIO has stated that this “cannot be furnished to you as per
\nSec. 8(1)(e)(g) of RTI Act, 2005 as these persons have had there depositions
\nrecorded in good faith and in confidence during the course of enquiry. cited
\nexemption.” In this case the judgment of the Delhi High Court in W.P.(C)
\nNo.3114\/2007 – Shri Bhagat Singh Vs. Chief Information Commissioner &
\nOrs is of relevance, since it deals with the application of sec. 8 sub-section (1) as
\nfollows:\n<\/p>\n
       12. “The Act is an effectuation of the right to freedom of speech and
\n       expression.      In an increasingly knowledge based society,
\n       information and access to information holds the key to resources,
\n       benefits, and distribution of power. Information, more than any
\n       other element, is of critical importance participatory democracy. By
\n       one fell stroke, under the Act, the make of procedures and official
\n       barriers that had previously impeded information, has been swept
\n       aside. The citizen and information seekers have, subject to a few
\n       exceptions, an overriding right to be given information on matters in<\/p>\n
                                         23<\/span>
\n           the possession of the state and public agencies that are covered by
\n          the Act. As is reflected in its preambular paragraphs, the enactment
\n          seeks to promote transparency, arrest corruption and to hold the
\n          government and its instrumentalities accountable to the governed.
\n          This spirit of the Act must be borne in mind while construing the
\n          provisions contained therein.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          13. Access to information under Section 3 of the Act, is the rule and
\n          exemptions under Section 8, the exception. Section 8 being a
\n          restriction on this fundamental right, must therefore is to be
\n          strictly construed. It should not be interpreted in manner as to
\n          shadow the very right self. 1 ”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         Therefore, it is not enough to simply cite a clause to seek exemption.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Reasons for so doing will have to be explained. Besides, it is open to the CPIO to
\nexercise severability as described in Sec 10 sub-section (1) of the Act requiring
\nthat “access may be provided to that part of the record which does not contain
\nany information which is exempt from disclosure under this Act and which can
\nreasonably be severed from any part that contains such information” The CPIO
\nmay therefore proceed in the manner prescribed in Sec 10 sub-section (2)<\/p>\n
         For the above reasons, the orders in appeal in all three cases are set
\naside. The DCP (Vig) Shri Rajesh Kumar will now provide a pointwise answer in
\nthe case of all three applications. If the answers are to be found in the Vigilance
\nEnquiry Report, reference may be made to the specific part of that report where
\nthe answers are to be found in answering the questions raised by appellant in her
\nthree applications. This he will do within one month of the date of issue of
\nthis Decision Notice. More time is being given to CPIO for this purpose so as
\nto ensure that he is able to collect the information required from DCPs to whom
\nthe applications had been transferred for responding and to exercise his authority
\nu\/s 10 sub-section (2).\n<\/p>\n
         We also find that in case of the application of 8.12.06 which was received in
\nthe office of D.C.P. on 15.12.06, a response has only gone on 22.1.07 when in
\nfact it had become due by 15.1.07. The request of 29.12.06 had not been
\n1<\/span>
\n    Emphasis ours<\/p>\n
                                           24<\/span>
\n responded to by the CPIO. Whereas we are willing to accept that because there
\nwas an impression in the Department that a reply to the application of 29.12.06
\nstood given by the response to the application of 8.12.06, we cannot accept the
\nexcuse of DCP Shri Rajesh Kumar made in the hearing that the delay occurred
\nbecause the Vigilance Office is scattered. It is the business of every public
\nauthority to ensure that its systems are made commensurate with the law, not
\nvice versa. For this reason, Ms. Shalini Singh then PIO and DCP (Vig.) will show
\ncause why she should not be held liable for a penalty of Rs. 250\/- a day from
\n15.1.07 to 22.1.07 amounting to Rs. 1750\/-. She may do this in writing by
\n20.1.2009 or by personal appearance before us on 20.2.2009 at 4.00 p.m.<\/p>\n
      Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to
\nthe parties.\n<\/p>\n
(Wajahat Habibullah)
\nChief Information Commissioner
\n26.12.2008<\/p>\n
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against
\napplication and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO
\nof this Commission.\n<\/p>\n
Pankaj Shreyaskar)
\nJoint Registrar
\n26.12.2008<\/p>\n
                                       25<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission Ms. Shama Parveen vs Ministry Of Home Affairs (Mha). on 26 December, 2008 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Appeal No.CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/01069 dated 14.11.2007 Right to Information Act 2005 – Section 19 Appellant – Ms. Shama Parveen Respondent – Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). Facts : Ms. Shama Parveen of Bijnor (UP) moved three applications of […]<\/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-195002","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-central-information-commission","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"\nMs. Shama Parveen vs Ministry Of Home Affairs (Mha). on 26 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ms. Shama Parveen vs Ministry Of Home Affairs (Mha). on 26 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-12-25T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-11-27T12:48:09+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=\"40 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ms. Shama Parveen vs Ministry Of Home Affairs (Mha). on 26 December, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-27T12:48:09+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008\"},\"wordCount\":7363,\"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\\\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008\",\"name\":\"Ms. Shama Parveen vs Ministry Of Home Affairs (Mha). on 26 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-27T12:48:09+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ms. Shama Parveen vs Ministry Of Home Affairs (Mha). on 26 December, 2008\"}]},{\"@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:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"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":"Ms. Shama Parveen vs Ministry Of Home Affairs (Mha). on 26 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ms. Shama Parveen vs Ministry Of Home Affairs (Mha). on 26 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-12-25T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-11-27T12:48:09+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":"40 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ms. Shama Parveen vs Ministry Of Home Affairs (Mha). on 26 December, 2008","datePublished":"2008-12-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-27T12:48:09+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008"},"wordCount":7363,"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\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008","name":"Ms. Shama Parveen vs Ministry Of Home Affairs (Mha). on 26 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-12-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-27T12:48:09+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-shama-parveen-vs-ministry-of-home-affairs-mha-on-26-december-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ms. Shama Parveen vs Ministry Of Home Affairs (Mha). on 26 December, 2008"}]},{"@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:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","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\/195002","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=195002"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/195002\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=195002"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=195002"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=195002"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}