{"id":268303,"date":"2009-06-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-06-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009"},"modified":"2016-11-04T12:56:07","modified_gmt":"2016-11-04T07:26:07","slug":"shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009","title":{"rendered":"Shri R.K. Arya vs Deputy Commissioners Police … on 18 June, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission<\/div>\n
Shri R.K. Arya vs Deputy Commissioners Police … on 18 June, 2009<\/div>\n
                CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION\n                Appeal Nos. CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/001610 dated 11 -12-2007\n                    Right to Information Act<\/a> 2005 - Section 19\n\n\nAppellant:     Shri R.K. Arya\nRespondent: Deputy Commissioners Police (DCP), Economic Offences Wing\n(EOW).\n\nFacts<\/pre>\n
        We have two Appeals in file Nos. CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/001547 and
\nCIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/001610 that are identical except in that the information
\nsought is with regard to two different Police Officers: Inspector Shri R.K. Gulia
\nin File No. CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/001547 and Sub Inspector Shri Suresh Lakra in
\nFile No. CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/001610. The information sought in both the cases is
\nas follows, with the name of Sub Inspector Shri Suresh Lakra replacing that of
\nInspector Gulia in the application concerning SI Lakra.\n<\/p>\n
           1. “Please tell the residential address of Shri Suresh Lakra,
\n              Sub-Inspector (EOW) Crime, Delhi Police having office at
\n              Qutub Institutional Area, Mehrauli,      New Delhi.\n<\/p>\n
           2. Please supply the copy of Income Tax return filed by Shri
\n              Suresh Lakra, Sub-Inspector, to Income Tax Department
\n              and to you for the years 2002 to 2006.\n<\/p>\n
           3. Please give the details of properties, which have been
\n              furnished by Shri Suresh Lakra, Sub-Inspector (EOW)
\n              Crime, Delhi Police at the time to join  the service for the
\n              year 2005 and 2006.\n<\/p>\n
           4. Please tell what is gross salary and carrying home salary
\n              of Shri Suresh Lakra, Sub-Inspector (EOW) Crime, Delhi
\n              Police.\n<\/p>\n
        In both cases an identical response was received dated 2.4.2007
\nrefusing the information\/documents, sought u\/s 8 (1) (j) of the Right to
\nInformation Act<\/a>, 2005. In both cases appeals were moved on 20.4.2007 and
\nan identical decision dated 15.5.2007 given by Shri Ranjit Narayan, JCP
\n(Crime) as follows:\n<\/p>\n
        “Having carefully gone through the contents of appeal and
\n        material available on record, it is found that the appellant has
\n        sought personal information mentioned above in respect of Inspr.
\n        R. K. Gulia, which has no relationship to any public activity or
\n        interest. Undoubtedly, disclosure of this personal information
\n        would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the<\/p>\n
                                        1<\/span>
\n        individual. The exemption of information u\/s 8 (1) (j) of the RTI
\n       Act<\/a>, 2005, has, therefore, been correctly applied by the PIO. The
\n       decision of PIO is upheld.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       Appellant’s prayer before us is also identical in both cases and reads
\nas follows:\n<\/p>\n
       “Relief sought against the act and conduct\/ gross
\n       negligence of the said PIO and the First Appellate Authority
\n       under Right to Information Act<\/a>, 2005.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       In both cases penalty has been sought against the CPIO and Appellate
\nAuthority. Four appeals were heard together on 13-4-2009. The following
\nwere present.\n<\/p>\n
Appellants
\nShri Rajender Kumar Arya
\nShri Ramesh Kumar
\nRespondents
\nShri K.K. Vyas, DCP
\nShri Ramesh Chander, Inspector
\nShri M.K. Mishra, S.I.\n<\/p>\n
Shri Ganga Sahai Meena, ACP\/HQ\/E<\/p>\n
       In the two cases mentioned in Para 1 DCP Shri K.K. Vyas clarified that
\nthe officers concerned are no longer with EOW but are (i) Mr. R.K. Gulia with
\nCrime Branch and (ii) Shri Suresh Lakra with Security. Although, already
\nexplained to DCP at least part of the information sought by the appellant
\nregarding these officers is fully disclosable suo moto u\/s 4 (1) (b) (ix) and (x)
\nof the RTI Act<\/a>, but before ordering full disclosure of the information sought
\nboth parties being a third party in these cases we deemed it necessary that
\nwe give them opportunity to be heard. The hearing in both these cases was,
\n                          st
\ntherefore, adjourned to 1 May 2009 at 11.30 a.m. when appellant and third
\nparties were directed to appear. The DCP, EOW having made his points was
\nnot required to appear. Accordingly the cases were heard once more on 15-5-
\n2009. The following were present
\nAppellants
\nShri Rajender Kumar Arya
\nShri R. K. Goyal.\n<\/p>\n
Respondent
\nShri Ram Kanwar Gulia, Inspector.\n<\/p>\n
                                       2<\/span><\/p>\n
      Shri Lakra appeared for hearing at 12.45 p.m. He submitted that first he
\nhad gone to Old JNU campus as he was not aware as to where he has to
\nreport because he received the message over the telephone a day before and
\ncould not determine where he has to report. He therefore sought opportunity
\nfor further hearing, which was accepted, and accordingly the hearing in File
\n                                                     th
\nNo. CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/001610. was adjourned to 12 June, 2009 at 12.30 p.m.
\nwhen Shri Suresh Lakra was asked to be present. The appellant was also to
\nappear if he so wished. The hearing in file No. CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/01610 was
\nheld on 12-6-2009, when the following are present.\n<\/p>\n
      Appellant
\n      Shri Rajender Kumar Arya.\n<\/p>\n
      Shri Ramesh
\n      Respondent
\n      Shri Suresh Kumar, SI.\n<\/p>\n
      Shri Suresh Kumar submitted written arguments stating that he was
\nInvestigating Officer in the case involving Shri R.K. Arya as a result of which
\nShri Arya has been stalking him and harassing his family.              He has
\napprehensions of danger to his family.      In this context he has cited the
\nfollowing from our decision in file No. CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/1547:\n<\/p>\n
      “That the CIC further held, ‘that their can be an exception to this
\n      rule if the position held by the official concerned or the work he\/
\n      she is engaged is of so sensitive a nature that any such
\n      disclosure could lead to apprehension to the life of physical
\n      safety of the persons in which case it will merit exemption from
\n      disclosure of information.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      On this basis he has gone on to argue that his residential address
\nshould not be disclosed for the following reasons:\n<\/p>\n
      “a)    The appellant Shri Rajendra Kumar Arya was rightly
\n             involved in case FIR No. 140\/2006 dated 5.4.2006 u\/s
\n             63\/65 C.R. Act and 420\/120B, P. S. Krishna Nagar on the
\n             basis of the raid conducted on the complaint of Mr.
\n             Anurudh Kumar Chaubey authorised representative of
\n             Hoghton Miffin Co. on 5.4.2006. it may be stated that
\n             when he has produced before the learned ACMM on
\n             6.4.2006, he did not point out any procedural discrepancy
\n             or misbehaviour caused during course of investigation.
\n             He levelled many such allegations in an after thought
\n             manner there after.        On 21.4.2006, the accused
\n             (Appellant here) did not reveal any grudge what so ever
\n             against either the complainant or the police. If he<\/p>\n
                                       3<\/span>
\n      (Appellant) would have any, he was free to bring out into
\n     the notice of the court.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Further the appellant did not mention any of his
\n     complaints in the bail petition, which he made later on two
\n     different quarters that certain files and other articles were
\n     stolen from his house by the raiding team and also
\n     regarding misbehaviour caused to him. Those articles
\n     were not allegedly mentioned in the seizure memo
\n     prepared by the police. Even though the complaints of
\n     the appellant were taken into consideration by the
\n     Hon’ble Court, the appellant unceasingly took the issue to
\n     different authorities and tried to mount pressure on the
\n     investigating officers.       Further the appellant has
\n     attempted to pressurize the complainant by sending his
\n     men to the residence of the complainant for a negotiation
\n     in the matter in the night intervening 18\/19-5-06. The
\n     appellant has been trying to hamper the investigation by
\n     putting pressure on the IO and ACP\/IPR by way of
\n     throwing complaints. The acts of the appellants are really
\n     revenge against the police and prosecution witness
\n     because of the reason he was booked by them. When on
\n     5.5.2006, the Hon’ble ASJ ordered the appellant to
\n     furnish the sale records to the IO he engineered a plan to
\n     file a complaint against the raiding party so that he may
\n     escape the liability of producing the records.            The
\n     appellant devised a way to pressurize the IO by sending
\n     a legal notice under different sections of law with
\n     threatening language though he was caught with
\n     infringed books. The appellant has been suing his
\n     energy to hamper the investigation by way of filing false
\n     and frivolous complaints against the complaints and the
\n     investigating agency. The appellant tried to tamper with
\n     the evidences and win over the witnesses.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     From the above, it is clear that the appellant was having a
\n     hostile attitude towards the respondent, who was the IO
\n     of the case( SI Suresh Lakra) to bring any physical and
\n     bodily harm including the faculty of the respondents.
\n     Moreover the respondent was dealing with the case of
\n     sensitive nature in that the disclosure of the residence of
\n     the respondent could lead to apprehension of danger to
\n     the life of physical safety of the person and all the
\n     circumstances will merit the exemption from disclosure of
\n     information.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
b)   Ignited by the vengeance reaped up the appellant to
\n     cause bodily and physical harm to the respondent, the
\n     appellant filled three complaint cases bearing No.
\n     21\/2007, 26\/2007 and 33\/2007. In all the aforesaid<\/p>\n
                               4<\/span>
\n               criminal cases, the appellant has alleged that the
\n              respondent had demanded and accepted the bribe from
\n              the appellant. The bribe money according to appellant
\n              ranged between thousands and lakhs at different
\n              occasions. The appellant further alleged that respondent
\n              was having the properties, which were disproportionate to
\n              his known sources of income. In complaint no. 26\/07 and
\n              33\/07 the appellant levelled false allegation against
\n              Inspector Tej Pal and DCP Mahavir Singh to save the
\n              respondent from the punishment and to register a FIR
\n              under different section of law. All the three complaint
\n              cases were dismissed by the learned Court of Shri S. P.
\n              Garg, Special Judge, Tis Hazari Courts Delhi vide
\n              judgement\/ Order dated 20.12.2008. All this goes to
\n              show that the appellant wanted to cause bodily harm and
\n              injury to the respondent. The learned special judge has
\n              given a number of the grounds in support of his decision
\n              while dismissing the complaints. The respondent is not
\n              repeating the grounds of dismissal of the complaints or
\n              the sake of brevity.\n<\/p>\n
       c)     That it is established that the appellant wants to cause
\n              harm in body and faculties of the respondent by filing
\n              false complaints of corruption against the respondent. It
\n              will further be seen that the sanction under section 197<\/a>
\n              read with section 140<\/a> of Delhi Police Act 1978 and u\/s 19
\n              of Prevention of Corruption Act<\/a> 1988 to lodge the criminal
\n              proceedings against the respondents u\/s 381\/342\/341 etc
\n              and u\/s 13 (1) of Prevention of Corruption act 1988 was
\n              rejected by the Hon’ble Lt. Governor NCT Delhi vide
\n              order F.7\/57\/2006\/HP-1\/ESTT.6199 dated 13.11.2007.\n<\/p>\n
              Thus the appellant was out and out intending to cause
\n              bodily harm and so the respondent is apprehending the
\n              danger to his life of public safety, thus the circumstances
\n              merit the exemption from disclosure of information.”\n<\/p>\n
       He concluded with the argument that such disclosure will amount to
\nviolation of Article 21<\/a> of the Constitution of India.\n<\/p>\n
                               DECISION NOTICE:\n<\/p>\n
       In this case the exemption sought by Shri Lakra from disclosure of his
\nresidential address is with regard to the position held by him. However, this
\nposition has not been classified by the Police Department. We would only<\/p>\n
                                          5<\/span>
\n reiterate what we has stated in the case of “R.K. Arya Vs. DCP, EOW” file No.
\nCIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/1547 in which we have held as follows:\n<\/p>\n
       “A conscious decision of this nature will have to be taken with
\n       regard to each such official failing which this exemption cannot
\n       be claimed in a general manner.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       A conscious decision of this nature will have to be taken at least by the
\nHead of Department and not by the official himself. As held by us in the
\nearlier case cited above the official residential address is an integral part of
\nthe disclosure mandated for every public authority u\/s 4 (1) (b) (ix). In view of
\nthis the appeal is allowed. The information asked will be provided to the
\nappellant Shri Arya by the CPIO within 10 working days of the date of issue of
\nthis decision notice.\n<\/p>\n
       Reserved in the hearing, this Decision is announced in open chamber
\non this 18th day of June, 2009. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to
\nthe parties.\n<\/p>\n
(Wajahat Habibullah)
\nChief Information Commissioner
\n18-6-2009<\/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 K.P. Shreyaskar)
\nJoint Registrar
\n18-6-2009<\/p>\n
                                       6<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission Shri R.K. Arya vs Deputy Commissioners Police … on 18 June, 2009 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Appeal Nos. CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/001610 dated 11 -12-2007 Right to Information Act 2005 – Section 19 Appellant: Shri R.K. Arya Respondent: Deputy Commissioners Police (DCP), Economic Offences Wing (EOW). Facts We have two Appeals in file Nos. CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/001547 and […]<\/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-268303","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-central-information-commission","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"\nShri R.K. Arya vs Deputy Commissioners Police ... on 18 June, 2009 - 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\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shri R.K. Arya vs Deputy Commissioners Police ... on 18 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-06-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-11-04T07:26:07+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=\"10 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-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shri R.K. Arya vs Deputy Commissioners Police … on 18 June, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-04T07:26:07+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1950,\"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-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009\",\"name\":\"Shri R.K. Arya vs Deputy Commissioners Police ... on 18 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-04T07:26:07+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shri R.K. Arya vs Deputy Commissioners Police … on 18 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 R.K. Arya vs Deputy Commissioners Police ... on 18 June, 2009 - 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\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shri R.K. Arya vs Deputy Commissioners Police ... on 18 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-06-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-11-04T07:26:07+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shri R.K. Arya vs Deputy Commissioners Police … on 18 June, 2009","datePublished":"2009-06-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-04T07:26:07+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009"},"wordCount":1950,"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-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009","name":"Shri R.K. Arya vs Deputy Commissioners Police ... on 18 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-06-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-04T07:26:07+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-r-k-arya-vs-deputy-commissioners-police-on-18-june-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shri R.K. Arya vs Deputy Commissioners Police … on 18 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\/268303","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=268303"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/268303\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=268303"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=268303"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=268303"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}