{"id":260677,"date":"2009-06-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-06-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009"},"modified":"2016-02-26T23:11:30","modified_gmt":"2016-02-26T17:41:30","slug":"shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009","title":{"rendered":"Shri Ajay Ganesh Ubale vs Central Bureau Of Investigation &#8230; on 3 June, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Central Information Commission<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Shri Ajay Ganesh Ubale vs Central Bureau Of Investigation &#8230; on 3 June, 2009<\/div>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">                CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION\n              2nd Adjunct to Appeal No.CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/00116 dated 5.2.2007\n                       Right to <a href=\"\/doc\/1965344\/\" id=\"a_1\">Information Act<\/a> 2005 - Section 19\n\n\nAppellant -    Shri Ajay Ganesh Ubale\nRespondent - Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_1\">. FACTS<br \/>\nIn our Decision of 29.1.2008, we had directed as follows:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote id=\"blockquote_1\"><p>      &#8220;This brings us to the question of disclosure of information sought in<br \/>\n      the present case. <a href=\"\/doc\/1525538\/\" id=\"a_1\">Section 8(1)<\/a> (h) exempts from disclosure any<br \/>\n      information which would &#8220;impede the process of investigation or<br \/>\n      apprehension or prosecution of offenders&#8221;. The language used in<br \/>\n      the provision indicates that mere continuation of prosecution or<br \/>\n      process of investigation is not enough to deny information to an<br \/>\n      information seeker under the <a href=\"\/doc\/671631\/\" id=\"a_2\">RTI Act<\/a>, unless the disclosure of such<br \/>\n      information would impede the process of investigation or<br \/>\n      apprehension or prosecution of offenders. Insofar as this case is<br \/>\n      concerned, a revision petition has been filed before the High Court<br \/>\n      which is still pending. Mere pendency of a revision petition is not<br \/>\n      enough to substantiate that the disclosure of information would in<br \/>\n      any way impede the prosecution. The respondents have failed to<br \/>\n      establish before us that the disclosure of information would in any<br \/>\n      way do so. The Commission is, therefore, of the view that the<br \/>\n      denial of information under <a href=\"\/doc\/1525538\/\" id=\"a_3\">Section 8(1)<\/a> (h) in the present case<br \/>\n      cannot be held to be justified. The issue is decided accordingly.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote id=\"blockquote_1\"><p>      The CPIO is now, therefore, directed to provide the information to<br \/>\n      the appellant within 3 weeks from the receipt of the decision, and<br \/>\n      will submit a report to this Shri Pankaj Shreyaskar Jt Registrar of<br \/>\n      this Commission certifying the manner in which the decision has<br \/>\n      been complied with.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p id=\"p_1\">     Subsequently we received complaint of non compliance from the appellant<br \/>\nfollowing which the compliance report from the CPIO, CBI had been sought.<br \/>\nCPIO, CBI has informed by a letter dated 23.5.09 that &#8220;all the available<br \/>\ndocuments in the branch were shown to Shri Ajay G. Ubale on 29.02.2008.<br \/>\nHowever, Shri Ajay G. Ubale requested some more documents as mentioned in<br \/>\nAnnexure C of his letter. Efforts were made to find out any other documents that<br \/>\nremain to be shown to him available in any other branch or in the Malkhana of<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_1\">                                          1<\/span><br \/>\n Special Crime Branch. Out of 11 mentioned in the Annexure C, only 4 were<br \/>\nfound to be available. Shri Ajay G. Ubale was informed over telephone and also<br \/>\nan official of CBI was sent to his residence with a message to come to CBI, SCB<br \/>\nMumbai office at Belapur and inspect the documents as requested by him.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\">     On the other hand, the Commission has received yet another e-mail from<br \/>\nthe appellant in which he informed the Commission that two CBI officials were<br \/>\nsent to his residence without any official communication from the CBI office and<br \/>\nasking his wife to give in writing that he is not in town. In his view this act of the<br \/>\nCBI is malafide and amounts to intimidation.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_3\">     The Commission has already passed an order to provide all the information<br \/>\nto the appellant and accordingly CBI submits that orders have been complied<br \/>\nwith whereas the appellant insist that orders have not been complied with.&#8221;<br \/>\nTreating this as a complaint, this Commission appointed Shri Tarun Kumar, Jt.<br \/>\nSecretary and Addl. Registrar, Central Information Commission to conduct an<br \/>\nenquiry into the matter. Consequently Shri Tarun Kumar in his report of<br \/>\n12.1.2009 reported as follows:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote id=\"blockquote_2\"><p>       &#8220;3.    Shri Ajay Ubale had pointed out in his letter dated 29.3.2008<br \/>\n              registered in the Commission on 25.4.2008 vide its diary no.<br \/>\n              17199\/08 accordingly on 8th October, 2008 office of CBI<br \/>\n              conducted SP, CBI\/SCB, Mumbai by the undersigned.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote id=\"blockquote_3\"><p>       4.     As per the notice of the inquiry the SP, CBI\/ SCB vide its<br \/>\n              letter dated 3rd October, 2008. The CPIO was directed to<br \/>\n              produce all the records in original as per Annexure-C<br \/>\n              including those documents which were located in Tanna<br \/>\n              office where the inquiry against Shri Ajay Ubale the appellant<br \/>\n              was initiated by the CBI.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote id=\"blockquote_4\"><p>       5.     During the inquiry on 8.10.2008, the SP, CBI (CPIO)<br \/>\n              arranged for all the files available and Shri Ajay Ubale was<br \/>\n              asked to peruse and examine all the documents in my<br \/>\n              presence. After examination by Shri Ajay Ubale, Annexure<br \/>\n              C-1 was prepared keeping in view the files which were made<br \/>\n              available for inspection. From the perusal of this Annexure<br \/>\n              C-1, it may be seen that only 2 files and 1 case diary listed in<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_1\">                                          2<\/span><br \/>\n       serial no. 1, 3 &amp; 10 could not be made available for<br \/>\n      inspection.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p id=\"p_4\">6.    With regard of serial no. 10 case diary of N. Sarwade, SP,<br \/>\n      CBI\/ ACB, it was stated by the CPOIO that case diary is not<br \/>\n      written at the level of SP, CBI. There is no such document<br \/>\n      as listed on serial no. 10 i.e. this case diary of N. Sarwade,<br \/>\n      SP, CBI, ACB. However, SP, CBI (CPIO) was conscious<br \/>\n      enough to seek more time for making, therefore, search of<br \/>\n      those documents which could not perused on 8.10.2008.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\">7.    Accordingly, vide letter dated 10th October 2008 issued from<br \/>\n      Camp office in Mumbai a further time of 10 days was given<br \/>\n      to SP, CBI to locate these documents and make them<br \/>\n      available for inspection by Shri Ajay Ubale. However, vide<br \/>\n      FAX dated 17.1.2009 further time was sought which was<br \/>\n      granted for recovering\/ locating the necessary files.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\">8.    Thereafter vide letter dated 14.12.2008 the CPIO has<br \/>\n      informed as under:-\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\">&#8220;In this connection, it is submitted that all efforts were made by the<br \/>\n       concerned officers\/ officials of this branch to find out about<br \/>\n       the status of the case files mentioned in your above<br \/>\n       mentioned letter. All; concerned officers have reported that<br \/>\n       no such files are available in their office. Hence these files<br \/>\n       are not available.&#8221; (Flag C).\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_8\">9.    In view of this, it is therefore, clear that as per Annexure C<br \/>\n      submitted by Shri Ajay Ubale with his petition for non<br \/>\n      compliance and Annexure C-1 prepared during the course of<br \/>\n      inquiry and verification of records, the following three files\/<br \/>\n      documents as listed in the Annexure C-1 were stated to be<br \/>\n      not available in the office of the CPIO, CBI,SCB, Mumbai:-<br \/>\n      (1)    Files for receipt of complaint on 16.7.2001 from Navin<br \/>\n             Dubey\/ note sheet processing and action taken.<\/p>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">\n\n      (3)    Files for processing request dated 17.7.2001 to\n             Central Bank       and Bank of Baroda.\n\n      (10)   Case diary of N. Sarawade, SP, SCI, ACB.\n\n<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_9\">Thus in view of the above factual position it is evident that after<br \/>\nseveral opportunities and time given the CPIO, CBI despite his best<br \/>\nefforts has not been able to produce the above mentioned<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_2\">                                  3<\/span><br \/>\n       documents and his last letter dated 14.12.2008 he has confirmed<br \/>\n      that the said information is not available.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_10\">     On the basis of the above enquiry report, we decided that a final hearing<br \/>\nwill be held on the complaint of Shri Ajay G. Ubale of Mumbai regarding non<br \/>\ncompliance of decision of this Commission followed by adjunct of 29.1.08. A<br \/>\ncopy of the enquiry report was sent to both the parties and a final hearing held on<br \/>\n3.6.2009. The following are present:\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_11\">At NIC Studio, Mumbai<br \/>\nAppellant<br \/>\n             Shri Ajay G. Ubale<br \/>\nRespondent<br \/>\n             Shri Amitabh Thakur, SP, Special Branch, CBI<br \/>\nAt NIC Studio, Hyderabad<br \/>\nRespondent<br \/>\n             Shri Laxmi Narayan, DIG, ACB, CBI<\/p>\n<p>Enquiry Officer at CIC Studio, New Delhi.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_12\">             Shri Tarun Kumar, Jt. Secretary &amp; Addl. Registrar, CIC<\/p>\n<p>     Shri Amitabh Thakur, SP, Special Branch, CBI Mumbai submitted that<br \/>\nevery effort has been made to trace the records which are not in the possession<br \/>\nof CBI. Shri Ajay G. Ubale on the other hand submitted that because of the<br \/>\naction of the CBI he has sought permission for prosecution first from the<br \/>\nDepartment which was refused and at present from High Court of Mumbai before<br \/>\nwhom the case is pending. Union of India through Ministry of Home Affairs in<br \/>\nthat case has submitted an affidavit referring to some documents which are part<br \/>\nof the files in processing the request dated 17.7.2001 addressed to the Central<br \/>\nBank of India and Bank of Baroda of which they are custodian and on the basis<br \/>\nof which they have contended operational exigencies for taking the action which<br \/>\nthey have taken. This would imply that such documents do exist on the basis of<br \/>\nwhich they have pleaded &#8216;operational exigency&#8217;. In either case, there has been<br \/>\nan attempt to conceal the facts, either by the Ministry of Home Affairs, which has<br \/>\nthen relied on documents that they do not possess and have, therefore, filed a<br \/>\nfalse affidavit, or the documents are indeed in their possession and they have<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_3\">                                        4<\/span><br \/>\n falsely denied the existence of existing records to the4 applicant in violation of<br \/>\nthe <a href=\"\/doc\/671631\/\" id=\"a_4\">RTI Act<\/a>.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_13\">                               DECISION NOTICE<\/p>\n<p>      From the above it is now clear that the only matter pending disclosure is<br \/>\nthe question of files for processing the request dated 17.7.01 addressed to<br \/>\nCentral Bank of India and Bank of Baroda with the issue being whether these<br \/>\nfiles are held by, in the possession of the CBI or under their control or not. It is<br \/>\nnow open to complainant Shri Ubale to use the information provided by the SP,<br \/>\nCBI, ACB with regard to these documents to challenge the affidavit submitted by<br \/>\nthe respondents in the case initiated by him before the High Court of Mumbai. If<br \/>\nin conclusion of these judicial proceedings the Hon&#8217;ble High Court of Mumbai<br \/>\nfinds malafide denial of a request for information calling for further action under<br \/>\nu\/2 20(1) of the <a href=\"\/doc\/671631\/\" id=\"a_5\">RTI Act<\/a>, this will be acted upon by this Commission. The<br \/>\ncomplaint is disposed of accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_14\">      Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to<br \/>\nthe parties.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_15\">(Wajahat Habibullah)<br \/>\nChief Information Commissioner<br \/>\n3.6.2009<\/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 of<br \/>\nthis Commission.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_16\">(Pankaj Shreyaskar)<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_4\">                                         5<\/span><br \/>\n Joint Registrar<br \/>\n3.6.2009<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_5\">                  6<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Central Information Commission Shri Ajay Ganesh Ubale vs Central Bureau Of Investigation &#8230; on 3 June, 2009 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION 2nd Adjunct to Appeal No.CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/00116 dated 5.2.2007 Right to Information Act 2005 &#8211; Section 19 Appellant &#8211; Shri Ajay Ganesh Ubale Respondent &#8211; Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) . FACTS In our Decision of 29.1.2008, [&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-260677","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 v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Shri Ajay Ganesh Ubale vs Central Bureau Of Investigation ... on 3 June, 2009 - 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-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shri Ajay Ganesh Ubale vs Central Bureau Of Investigation ... on 3 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-06-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-02-26T17:41:30+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=\"8 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-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shri Ajay Ganesh Ubale vs Central Bureau Of Investigation &#8230; on 3 June, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-26T17:41:30+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1553,\"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-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009\",\"name\":\"Shri Ajay Ganesh Ubale vs Central Bureau Of Investigation ... on 3 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-26T17:41:30+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shri Ajay Ganesh Ubale vs Central Bureau Of Investigation &#8230; on 3 June, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Shri Ajay Ganesh Ubale vs Central Bureau Of Investigation ... on 3 June, 2009 - 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-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shri Ajay Ganesh Ubale vs Central Bureau Of Investigation ... on 3 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-06-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-02-26T17:41:30+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shri Ajay Ganesh Ubale vs Central Bureau Of Investigation &#8230; on 3 June, 2009","datePublished":"2009-06-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-26T17:41:30+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009"},"wordCount":1553,"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-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009","name":"Shri Ajay Ganesh Ubale vs Central Bureau Of Investigation ... on 3 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-06-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-26T17:41:30+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-ajay-ganesh-ubale-vs-central-bureau-of-investigation-on-3-june-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shri Ajay Ganesh Ubale vs Central Bureau Of Investigation &#8230; on 3 June, 2009"}]},{"@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\/260677","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=260677"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/260677\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=260677"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=260677"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=260677"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}