{"id":32453,"date":"2009-02-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-02-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009"},"modified":"2018-08-18T09:25:00","modified_gmt":"2018-08-18T03:55:00","slug":"shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009","title":{"rendered":"Shri Rajender Singh vs Central Bureau Of … on 6 February, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission<\/div>\n
Shri Rajender Singh vs Central Bureau Of … on 6 February, 2009<\/div>\n
              CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION\n               Appeal No. CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/01300 dated 19-10-2007\n                  Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19\n\nAppellant:         Shri Rajender Singh\nRespondent:        Central Bureau of Investigation,(CBI)\n\n\nFACTS<\/pre>\n
      By an application of 3-5-2007 Shri Rajinder Singh of Vasant Kunj,
\nDelhi who was Public Prosecutor, CBI, EOU-VI, New Delhi applied to the SP,
\nCBI, EOU-VI, New Delhi seeking the following information comprised of 47
\nquestions:\n<\/p>\n
      “4.    Copy of memorandum dated 18.4.2007 submitted by the
\n             CBI to the Hon’ble Chairman, 6th Pay Commission, New
\n             Delhi for pay and allowances for entire staff of CBI.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      5.     Copy of action taken report, submitted by DCB\/ New
\n             Delhi to National Commission for Scheduled Castes, New
\n             Delhi in compliance of its letter dated 29.3.2007 regarding
\n             my complaint dated 9.1.2007.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      6.     Extracts of relevant portion of Noting Sheet of concerned
\n             file O\/o The Supd. Of Police, CBI, ACB, Silchar in which,
\n             my letter dated 31.1.2006 regarding grant of composite
\n             transfer grant and cash equivalent to 1\/3rd of my
\n             entitlement transpiration of baggage, dealt with and the
\n             extracts of relevant portion of noting sheet of concerned
\n             file in which my fax dated 2.2.2006 regarding said matter
\n             dealt with.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      7.     Extracts of the relevant portion of noting sheet of the
\n             concerned file, O\/o The Supdt. Of Police, CBI, EOU.VI,
\n             New Delhi in which my Travelling Allowance Bill for
\n             transfer dated 21.2.2006 dealt with.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      8.     Extracts of the relevant portion of the noting sheet O\/o
\n             The Suptd, of Police, CBI, EOU. VI, New Delhi in which
\n             my Transfer Application dated 20.3.2006 dealt with.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      9.     Copy of examination report\/ action taken report on my
\n             representation dated 5.3.2007 addressed to the Director,
\n             CBI, New Delhi in which the case of Raj Kishore Rabidas
\n             Vs. State, reported in AIR 1969, Calcutta, Page-321 has
\n             been referred.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                      1<\/span><\/p>\n
 10.   Copy of examination report\/ action taken report on my
\n      representation dated 5.3.2007 addressed to the
\n      Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Public grievances and
\n      Pension, (DOPT), New Delhi in which said case of Raj
\n      Kishore Rabidas Vs. State, reported in AIR 1969,
\n      Calcutta Page-321 has been referred.\n<\/p>\n
11.   Copy of examination report\/ action taken report on my
\n      representation dated 5.3.2007 addressed to the Director
\n      of Prosecution, CBI, New Delhi in which the said case of
\n      Raj Kishore Rabidas Vs. State, reported in AIR 1969,
\n      Calcutta Page 321 has been referred.\n<\/p>\n
12.   Copy of action taken report at point no. 5 of my said
\n      representation mentioned at Para 9 dated 5.3.2007 sent
\n      to the Dy. Inspector General of Police \/ACR\/CBI\/Patna\/
\n      Bihar vide no. 2099\/A-20\/R-46\/PF\/2006\/EOII\/CBI\/New
\n      Delhi dated 14.3.2007.\n<\/p>\n
13.   Copy of action taken report at point no. 7 of my said
\n      representation mentioned at para 9 dated 5.3.2007 sent
\n      to the Dy. Inspector of Police\/ ACR\/CBI\/Guwahati\/ Assam
\n      vide no. 2097\/A-20\/R-46\/PF\/2006\/EO.II\/CBI\/New Delhi
\n      dated 14.3.2007.\n<\/p>\n
14.   Copies of memos, which were drafted\/ prepared by Head
\n      office, CBI, New Delhi on the basis of complaints, sent by
\n      Shri P. D. Meena, the then SPI\/ CBI\/ACB\/Silchar and
\n      they were sent to Shri J. S. Tarang the then DLA, CBI,
\n      RO, Kolkata to serve on me.\n<\/p>\n
15.   Copy of my representation dated 4.4.2006 which was
\n      diarised at Sl. No. 276 on 10.4.2006 in the office of
\n      Directorate of Prosecution, CBI, New Delhi and copy of
\n      orders of DOP\/CBI\/ New Delhi on the said representation.\n<\/p>\n
16.   Signed copy of each page of Memorandum no.\n<\/p>\n
      221\/11\/2005-AVD-II dated 25.8.2005 served on me on
\n      25.10.2005.\n<\/p>\n
17.   Copy of Office Memorandum no. 11013\/2\/2004-Estt (A)
\n      dated 10.2.2004 issued by Ministry of Personnel, Public
\n      Grievances and Pension (DOPT), New Delhi.\n<\/p>\n
18.   Copy of comments of the concerned SP\/DIG regarding
\n      para 6 to 10 of my complaint dated 7.11.2006 forwarded
\n      by Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and
\n      Pensions, DOPT, New Delhi vide their letter No.
\n      258\/6\/2007-AVD, II dated 12.3.2007 (CBI ID No.
\n      DP\/PERS.I\/2007\/762\/3\/23\/98 (Pt.) dated 3.4.2007 is
\n      referred).\n<\/p>\n
                               2<\/span><\/p>\n
 19.   Copy of Log Book dated 10.5.2003 of all office vehicles,
\n      maintained in the O\/o the Supdt. Of Police\/ CBI\/ACB\/
\n      Ranchi.\n<\/p>\n
20.   Copy of Log Book dated 10.5.2003 of all the office
\n      vehicles, maintained in the office of Suptd. Of Police, CBI,
\n      AHD, Ranchi.\n<\/p>\n
21.   Copy of Log Book dated 10.5.2003 of all the office
\n      vehicles,  maintained   in    the    office     of
\n      DIG\/CBI\/ACB\/RO\/Ranchi.\n<\/p>\n
22.   Copy of my complaint dated 16.10.2003 under the
\n      subject: regarding discrimination between the Schedule
\n      Caste and General Caste employees, addressed to the
\n      Supdt of Police, CBI, ACB, Dhanbad, which was received
\n      by Shri Raghdu Nath Jhan, LDC, CBI, ACB, Dhanbad.\n<\/p>\n
23.   Copy of action taken report on my said complaint referred
\n      in para 22.\n<\/p>\n
24.   I had sent a letter to the Supdt of Police, CBI, ACB,
\n      Dhanbad with transaction no. 2433 dated 19.1.2004 of
\n      Head Post Office, DHN regarding discrimination among
\n      the Schedule Caste and General Caste employees.
\n      Copy of action taken report on said complaint.\n<\/p>\n
25.   Details of Departmental action initiated against the
\n      delinquent officers in terms of explanation to Ministry of
\n      Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension (DOPT) Order
\n      No. 11013\/2\/2004-Estt (A) dated 10.2.2004 (Para 23 and
\n      24 are referred).\n<\/p>\n
26.   Copy of my representation dated 3.9.2003 with reference
\n      to No. NIL\/3\/8(A)\/93-D\/RR dated 31.8.2003 received by
\n      Shri Raghu Nath, LDC, CBI, Dhanbad addressed to DIG,
\n      CBI, RO., Ranchi.\n<\/p>\n
27.   Copy of relevant portion of crime file in case RC
\n      8(A)\/93(D) in which said representation referred in para
\n      26 dealt with.\n<\/p>\n
28.   Copy of disclosure reports in RC 1(A)\/2000,RC 1(S)\/2003
\n      and RC 1(S)\/2004-CBI\/SCB\/LKO.\n<\/p>\n
29.   Copy of recommendations of IO\/SP\/DIG\/JD\/ Special
\n      Directors \/APP\/PP\/Sr\/PP\/ DLA\/ALA\/DOP in RC
\n      1(S)\/2000-CBI\/SCB\/LKO.\n<\/p>\n
                               3<\/span><\/p>\n
 30.   Copy of recommendations of IO\/SP\/DIG\/JD\/ Additional
\n      Directors \/APP\/PP\/Sr\/PP\/ DLA\/ALA\/DOP in RC 1(S)\/03
\n      and RC 1(S)\/04-CBI\/SCB\/LKO.\n<\/p>\n
31.   Copy of cognizance orders in RC 1(S)\/2000, RC-1(S)\/03
\n      and RC-1(S)\/04-CBI\/SCB\/LKO.\n<\/p>\n
32.   Copy of disclosure reports in RC 6\/95 and RC 8\/2005-\n<\/p>\n
      CBI\/EOU V, New Delhi.\n<\/p>\n
33.   Copy of recommendations of IO\/SP\/DIG\/JS\/ Special
\n      Directors  or Additional   Directors\/  APP\/PP\/Sr.
\n      PP\/DLA\/ALA\/DOP in RC 6\/95 and RC 8\/05-CBI, EOU V
\n      New Delhi.\n<\/p>\n
34.   copy of cognizance orders in RC 6\/95 and RC 8\/05-\n<\/p>\n
      CBI\/EOU V, new Delhi.\n<\/p>\n
35.   Copy of my complaint dated 17.10.2003 against Shri R. N.\n<\/p>\n
      Das, the then SR. PP, CBI, ACB, Dhanbad under subject
\n      regarding misconduct committed by the Sr. PP submitted
\n      to the office of Suptd of Police, CBI, ACB, DHN on
\n      17.10.2003.\n<\/p>\n
36.   Copy of action taken report the said complaint dated
\n      17.10.2003 complaint, mentioned at Para 35.\n<\/p>\n
37.   In response of No. NIL\/3\/8(A)\/93-D\/RR dated 31.8.2003, I
\n      have sent a letter to DIG\/ CBI\/Ranchi Region, Ranchi
\n      through    the      SP\/CBI\/SPE\/Dhanbad    which    was
\n      acknowledged by Shri Raghu Nath Jhan, LDC, CBI, ACB,
\n      DHN on 3.9.2003. Copy of said letter and action taken
\n      report on said letter.\n<\/p>\n
38.   Copy of CBI, HO, Letter No. 5\/5\/93-IWSU dated 6.7.1994.\n<\/p>\n
39.   Copy of DOP&T letter No. 207\/2\/93-AVD II dated
\n      1.7.1994.\n<\/p>\n
40.   Copy of my transfer T. A. Advance Application dated
\n      6.4.2004, submitted to the Supdt. Of Police, CBI, ACB,
\n      Silchar.\n<\/p>\n
41.   Copy of nothing Sheet of the relevant portion of the
\n      concerned file in which ,said transfer TA Advance
\n      application was dealt with.\n<\/p>\n
42.   Copy of DSPIL\/2004\/2561\/A\/24\/9\/2004 dated 27.4.2004.\n<\/p>\n
43.   Copy of Earned Leave application of mine, dated
\n      1.6.2004, submitted to the SP\/CBI\/ACB\/ Silchar.\n<\/p>\n
                              4<\/span><\/p>\n
       44.     Copy of letter vide which, my said EL application was
\n              sent to sr. PP\/CBI\/ACB\/Guwahati by the SP\/CBI\/ACB\/
\n              Silchar.\n<\/p>\n
      45.     Copy of the letter vide which, my said EL application was
\n              sent to DLA\/CBI\/ACB\/RO, Kolkatta by the SR. PP\/
\n              CBIACB, Guwahati.\n<\/p>\n
      46.     Copy of office order no.111\/2004 dated 23.6.2004, O\/o
\n              The SP\/ CBI\/ACB, Silchar.\n<\/p>\n
      47.     Copy of my Annual statement of General Provident Fund
\n              Account No. CBI\/ND\/7880 for year 2005-06 and 2006-07.\n<\/p>\n
      48.     Copy of TA Bill, submitted to the office of the Supdt of
\n              Polcie, CBI\/ ACB, Navi Mumbai after attending
\n              programme on Introduction to Computer application from
\n              27.11.2000 to 29.11.2000 conducted at Old JNU Campus,
\n              New Delhi, which has not been passed so far. Please
\n              verify from Railway Warrants counterfoil of the year 2000
\n              because two\/ R\/W were issued to me to perform journey
\n              from Bombay to New Delhi and back.\n<\/p>\n
      49.     Copy of file notings and copy of each page of my
\n              personal file\/ separate file, maintained by the PA to the
\n              Supdt of Police CBI\/ ACB, Silchar, keep in mind that I am
\n              not seeking information from my personal file, which was
\n              maintained in the Establishment Section, O\/o the SP\/
\n              CBI\/ACB\/ Silchar.\n<\/p>\n
      50.     Period for which information asked for last 14 years.”\n<\/p>\n
      In a response of 27-6-07 SP CBI, Dhanbad to whom the application
\nwas forwarded on 7-6-07 replied as per the following chart to 8 questions:\n<\/p>\n
       Para      Copy of my complaint dated 16.10.2003 regarding
\n       No.       discrimination between the Schedule Caste and General
\n       22        Caste employees, addressed to the Supdt of Police, CBI,
\n                 ACB, Dhanbad, which was received by Shri Raghdu Nath
\n                 Jha, LDC, CBI, ACB, Dhanbad.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       Reply    The complaint dated 16.10.2003 of the applicant was not
\n                received in the Branch. As on date this complaint is not
\n                appearing in the records of this office. The Receipt Register
\n                will be shown to you, if needed.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n\n       Para     Copy of action taken report on the applicant's complaint\n       No.      referred in para 22.\n       23<\/span>\n\n\n                                       5<\/span>\n<\/pre>\n
 Reply   Complaint along with the action taken report, if any, is not
\n        appearing in the records of this office.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Para    The applicant had sent a letter to the Supdt of Police, CBI,
\nNo.     ACB, Dhanbad with transaction no. 2433 dated 19.1.2004 of
\n24      Head Post Office, DHN regarding discrimination among the
\n        Schedule Caste and General Caste employees. Copy of
\n        action taken report on said complaint.\n<\/p>\n
        The letter dated 19.1.2004 of the applicant was received in
\nReply   the Branch which was diarised vide diary No. 46 dated
\n        20.1.2004 by Sri Raghu Nath Jha, LDC, CBI, ACB,
\n        Dhanbad. This letter is not appearing in the record of this
\n        office. The Receipt Register will be shown to you, if needed.
\nPara    Details of Departmental action initiated against the
\nNo.     delinquent officers in terms of explanation to Ministry of
\n25      Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension (DOPT) Order
\n        No. 11013\/2004-Estt (A) dated 10.2.2004 (Para 23 and 24
\n        are referred).\n<\/p>\n
Reply   The aforesaid letter of the applicant alongwith action taken
\n        report, if any, are not appearing in the records of this office.
\nPara    Copy of relevant portion of crime file in case RC 8(A)\/93(D)
\nNo.     in which said representation referred in para 26 dealt with.\n<\/p>\n
27<\/span><\/p>\n
        Information with regards to Para No. 27 of the applicant
\nReply   relates to the office of the DIG, CBI, RR, Ranchi. This fat is
\n        being brought to the notice of the DIG, CBI, RR, Ranchi.
\n        However, the Crime File of RC 8 (A)\/93-D will be made
\n        available to you for inspection, if needed.
\nPara    Copy of my complaint dated 17.10.2003 against Shri R. N.
\nNo.     Das, the then SR. PP, CBI, ACB, Dhanbad regarding
\n35      misconduct committed by the Sr. PP submitted to the office
\n        of Suptd of Police, CBI, ACB, DHN on 17.10.2003.\n<\/p>\n
        The complaint dated 17.10.2003 of the applicant, if any,
\nReply   against Shri R. N. Das, the then Sr. PP, CBI, ACB,
\n        Dhanbad, was not received by the Branch. As on date this
\n        complaint is not appearing in the records of this office. The
\n        receipt Register will be shown to you, if needed.<\/p>\n
\nPara    Copy of action taken report to the complaint dated\nNo.     17.10.2003.\n36<\/span>\n<\/pre>\n
reply   The records of this office does not show any action taken
\n        report against complaint dated 17.10.2003.
\nPara    In response of No. NIl\/3\/8(A)\/93-D\/RR dated 31.8.2003, the
\n37      applicant has sent a letter to DIG\/ CBI\/Ranchi Region,
\n        Ranchi through the SP\/CBI\/SPE\/Dhanbad which was
\n        acknowledged by Shri Raghu Nath Jhan, LDC, CBI, ACB,
\n        DHN on 3.9.2003.\n<\/p>\n
                               6<\/span><\/p>\n
                    The receipt register of this office does not show the receipt
\n                   of this letter. The Receipt Register will be shown to you, if
\n                   needed.\n<\/p>\n
         Not satisfied Shri Rajender Singh moved his first appeal before Shri A
\n  K. Singh, DIG (Police) CBI\/ACB\/RR, Ranchi praying that the CPIO may
\n  please be directed to furnish the information requested for. In the five grounds
\n  for appeal, however, only the following two are actually requests for
\n  information, the remaining being exxcoriation at the manner of functioning of
\n  the CBI, a mater outside the purview of the RTI Act 2005:
\n  “8.2   That as regards to Para 7.5 and 7.6 it is submitted that my letter
\n         dated 19.1.2004 has been diarized at SL No. 46 on 20.1.2004,
\n         which is missing from the official records of the office of the
\n         CPIO the CPIO has not indicated as to who is responsible for
\n         missing the said letter. In this way the CPIO has failed to
\n         maintain the devotion to duty by not making any inquiry for
\n         missing the said letter from the official records of the office of the
\n         CPIO.\n<\/p>\n
  8.3    That as regard to Para 7.9, 7.10 & 7.011 it is submitted that the
\n         information, requested for, related to the office of the CPIO the
\n         office of the DIG\/CBI\/RR, Ranchi does not concern. The CPIO
\n         is legally obliged to furnish the information sought for.”\n<\/p>\n
         Nevertheless, first Appellate Authority Shri A.K. Singh in his extensive
\n  order of 26-8-07 has gone into the merits of each point raised and has
\n  directed the CPIO to check receipt of complaints in some cases, to conduct
\n  an enquiry and fix responsibility in others. In compliance Shri R.N. Azad, SP,
\n  CBI, ACB, Dhanbad has sent appellant a response as per the following chart
\n  on 25-9-07:\n<\/p>\n
Q.  Contents             Decision of Appellate Authority Reply of CPIO (i.e.
\nNO.                      (i.e. DIG, CBI, RR, Ranchi)          SP, CBI, ACB,
\n                                                              Dhanbad)
\n22  The     applicant    The appellant has submitted that The            Receipt
\n&23 has requested        CPIO has not denied the facts Register              was
\n    for information      thatcom0plaint dated 16.10.03 was checked and it was
\n    of copy of his       not received by Shri Raghu Nath found that the said
\n    complaint dated      Jha, LDC. CPIO ha explained that complaint has been
\n    16.10.03 under       his reply is based on after cross received in the
\n    the      subject,    checking the receipt register for branch but the copy
\n    ‘regarding’          regd\/ speed post letters and receipt of the complaint is
\n    discrimination       letters received by post. It appears not      available.
\n    between              that applicant had submitted a Branch                 is
\n    Scheduled            complaint dated 16.10.03 to SP, conducting           an<\/p>\n
                                           7<\/span>
\n      Castes        and     CBI, Dhanbad and has reflected that        enquiry to fix the
\n     General castes        said letter was received by Shri           responsibility    for
\n     employees             Raghu Nath Jha, LDC. Hence, it             missing of the copy
\n     addressed        to   appears      that     applicant     had    of the complaint.
\n     SP, CBI, ACB,         submitted complaint to the branch
\n     Dhanbad which         directly and such letters may find
\n     was received by       entry into general receipt registers or
\n     Shri       Raghu      register meant for receipt of
\n     Nath Jha, LDC,        complaints. Hence, CPIO is directed
\n     CBI, Dhanbad          to check the receipt of the said
\n     and a copy of         complaint      in     other     register
\n     action      taken     maintained      with     branch     and
\n     report on the         thereafter, a suitable reply to the
\n     said complaint.       applicant.\n<\/p>\n
24   The     applicant     As CPIO has accepted that letter           The copy of the
\n     has requested         sent by applicant through post was         complaint         was
\n     for    copy      of   received in the office and was             received, however,
\n     action taken on       diarized vide no. 46 dated 20.1.04         it is not available in
\n     the           said    but the letter is not appearing in the     the records of the
\n     complaint sent        record of the office.         CPIO is      branch. Branch is
\n     by the applicant      directed to get an enquiry conducted       conducting         an
\n     to the SP, CBI,       and responsibility be fixed for            enquiry to fix the
\n     Dhanbad       with    missing of the said complaint.             responsibility     for
\n     transaction no.                                                  missing of the copy
\n     2433        dated                                                of the complaint.<\/p>\n
\n     19.1.04 of Head\n     Post        Office\n     Dhanbad\n     regarding\n     discrimination\n     among the SC\n     employee.\n25   The     applicant     The applicant had not requested for        Till date no enquiry\n     was requested         copy of the said letter but he had         was held hence\n     for details of        requested details of departmental          taking details of\n     departmental          action     initiated  against    the       departmental action\n     action initiated      delinquent officers in terms of            initiated against the\n     against        the    referred letter hence an appropriate       delinquent     officer\n     delinquent            reply be sent.                             does not arise.\n     officers in terms\n     of explanation to\n     Ministry         of\n     Personnel,\n     Public\n     Grievances and\n     Pension (DOPT)\n     Order          No.\n     11013\/2\/2004-\n     Estt (A) dated\n     10.2.304.\n\n\n                                            8<\/span>\n 27   The     applicant   It appears that para 26 and 27 are        Letter dated 3.9.03\n     has requested       inter related with each other but as      of the applicant\n     for    copy    of   para 26 has not been transferred to       addressed to DIG,\n     relevant portion    the branch hence reply of para 27         CBI, RR, Ranchi\n     of crime file in    does not appear to be complete.           was forwarded vide\n     case     RC     8   The appellant has requested for           this office letter No.\n     (A)\/93-D       in   copy of his representation dated          5115\/3\/8(A)\/93(D)\n     which        said   3.9.03 and copy of relevant portion       dated 16.9.03 .\n     representation      of crime file of RC 8 (A)\/93-D where      The           relevant\n     referred in para    referred representation was dealt         portion of the Diary\n     26 dealt with.      with. Hence, CPIO should give reply       No. 79 of dated\n                         accordingly.                              21.3.03 Court Diary\n                                                                   No. 81 of dated\n                                                                   28.4. 03           are\n                                                                   regarding\n                                                                   representation\n                                                                   21.4.03 of Shri\n                                                                   Rajendra        Singh,\n                                                                   then PP, alongwith\n                                                                   observation       DIG,\n                                                                   CBI, RR, Ranchi\n                                                                   dated          31.8.03\n                                                                   Which are part of\n                                                                   case pending in the\n                                                                   court.         Hence,\n                                                                   CPIO            clause\n                                                                   exemption u\/s 8 (1)\n                                                                   (h) of RTI Act 2005\n                                                                   for not providing the\n                                                                   documents\/\n                                                                   information\n                                                                   inspection of crime\n                                                                   file      also       to\n                                                                   appellant.\n35   The     applicant   CPIO has explained that his reply is      The            Receipt\n&    has requested       based on after cross checking the         Registers            of\n36   for coy of his      receipt register for regd\/ speed post     relevant period has\n     complaint dated     letters and receipt letters received by   been check which\n     17.10.2003          post. It appears that applicant had       do not show any\n     against Shri R.     submitted      a   complaint      dated   regarding receipt of\n     N. Das, the then    17.10.03 to SP, CBI, Dhanbad              complaint 17.10.03\n     Sr. PP CBI,         against Shri R. N. Das, the then SR.      from the appellant.\n     ACB, Dhanbad        PP, hence, it appears that applicant\n     under         the   had submitted complaint to the\n     subject             branch directly and such letters may\n     regarding           find entry into general receipt\n     misconduct          registers and register meant for\n     committed      by   receipt of complaints. Hence, CPIO\n     SR. PP and          is directed to check the receipt of the\n     copy of action      said complaint in other register\n\n\n                                          9<\/span>\n      taken report in       maintained with the branch and\n     the           said    thereafter, a suitable reply am be\n     complaint.            sent to the appellant.\n37   The      applicant    The appellant has submitted that          The            Receipt\n     has requested         CPIO has not denied the facts his         Register is showing\n     for copy of letter    letter dated 3.9.03 was not received      entry        regarding\n     sent to DIG,          by Shri Raghu Nath Jha, LDC,              receipt of letter\n     CBI,       Ranchi     CPIO has explained that his reply is      3.9.03 which was\n     through        SP,    based on after cross checking the         forwarded         DIG,\n     CBI, Dhanbad          receipt register for regd\/ speed post     CBI, RR, Ranchi\n     and                   letters and receipt letters received by   vide office letter No.\n     acknowledged          post. It appears that applicant had       5115\/3\/8(A) dated\n<\/pre>\n
     by Shri Raghu         submitted a letter dated 3.9.03           16.9.03.        Action
\n     Nath Jha on           addressed to DIG, CBI, RR through         taken report any is
\n     3.9.03 against        SP, CBI, Dhanbad and the said             not appearing in the
\n     the     response      letter was received by Shri Raghu         file of the branch.
\n     No.            Nil.   Nath Jha, LDC. Hence, it appears
\n     \/3\/8(A)\/93-D\/RR       that applicant had submitted a letter
\n     dated     31.8.03     to the branch directly and such
\n     and action taken      letters may find entry into general
\n     report on the         receipt registers or in the concerned
\n     said letter.          crime file. Hence, CPIO is directed
\n                           to check the receipt of the said letter
\n                           in other register maintained with
\n                           branch concerned crime file and
\n                           thereafter, a suitable reply may be
\n                           sent to the appellant.\n<\/p>\n
        Appellant has then moved a second appeal before us with the following
\n prayer:\n<\/p>\n
        “12.1 That the CPIO may please be directed to furnish the
\n              information requested for vide para 22, 24, 26, 27, 35
\n              & 37 of the application dated 3.5.2007.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
        12.2    that disciplinary action against the CPIO under the
\n                service rules may please be recommended for
\n                destruction of information which were the subject of
\n                the request, sought by para 22 and 24 of the
\n                application.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
        12.3    That the disciplinary action against the CPIO under
\n                the service rules may please be recommended to
\n                deny the request for information malfidely which
\n                were requested vide para 26 and 27 of the application.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
        12.4    That the penalty may please be imposed against the
\n                CPIO to furnish false information regarding para 35 of
\n                the application because the CPIO has informed that
\n                my complaint dated 17.10.2003 against Shri R. N. Das,<\/p>\n
                                           10<\/span>
\n                 then SR. PP\/CBI\/ACB, Dhanbad who was committed
\n                misconduct, not received by the office of the CPIO.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         12.5   That the penalty may please be imposed against the
\n                CPIO to furnish false information regarding para 37 of
\n                the application that the receipt register of the office
\n                of the CPIO does not show the receipt of the letter
\n                dated 3.9.2003<\/p>\n
         Of the 46 questions asked, therefore, appellant Shri Rajender Singh is
\n  dissatisfied with the responses to six.   The appeal was, therefore, heard
\n  through Video Conference on 6-2-2009. The Following are present.\n<\/p>\n
         Appellant (at CIC Studio Delhi)
\n         Shri Rajender Singh<\/p>\n
         Respondents
\n         Shri S. K. Peshin, SP, CBI, Delhi.\n<\/p>\n
         Shri V.P. Arya, SP, CBI, Dhanbad. (at CIC Studio, Dhanbad)
\n         Shri A. K. Singh, DIG, CBI, Ranchi.(at CID Studio Jharkhand)<\/p>\n
         Shri Rajender Sing submitted written arguments in which he has
\n  addressed the responses received from the CPIO and his own submission as
\n  follows:\n<\/p>\n
Q.  Order of CPIO Order of FAA Reply of CPIO                  Submissions         of
\nNO. dated 27.6.07   dated 24.8.07       dated 25.9.07         appellant
\n                                        to the decision
\n                                        of FAA dated
\n                                        24.8.07
\n22  Complaint dated CPIO           was The         CPIO   The       information
\n    16.10.03    was directed to check responded that      which      was    the
\n    not received in the         receipt the inquiry is    subject      of   the
\n    the office of register         and being conducted    request          was
\n    CPIO            thereafter        a to    fix    the  destroyed to shield
\n                    suitable reply be responsibility for  Shri R. N. Das, the
\n                    sent     to     the missing      the  then Sr. PP, CBI,
\n                    appellant.          com-plaint        ACB, DHN who did
\n                                        dated 16.10.03.   not appear in the
\n                                                          Court on 30.9.03
\n                                                          nor did he apply for
\n                                                          CL for the date
\n                                                          10.1.03, whereas
\n                                                          salary was paid to
\n                                                          him for these dates.\n<\/p>\n
24   Letter    dated CPIO         was The         CPIO Do\n     19.1.04    was directed to get an responded that\n     received in the enquiry           the office of the\n     office of CPIO conducted to fix CPIO              is\n\n\n                                       11<\/span>\n<\/pre>\n
      but it is not responsibility for conducting an
\n     appearing in the missing the letter inquiry to fix the
\n     records of the dated 19.1.04.        responsibility for
\n     office of CPIO.                      missing       the
\n                                          complaint dated
\n                                          19.1.04.\n<\/p>\n
26   The         CPIO The CPIO was The                CPIO        The exemption is
\n&    responded that directed to give claimed                      not claimable. The
\n27   reply to question appropriate reply. exemption u\/s 8         CPIO          claimed
\n     No. 26 & 27                          (1) (h) under the       exemption only to
\n     relate to the                        RTI Act.                shield Shri B. B.\n<\/p>\n
     office of FAA                                                Mishra, the then\n     hence it is being                                            Dy.         Inspector\n     brought in the                                               General of Police\n     notice of FAA.                                               CBI\/ ACB Ranchi,\n                                                                  Region Ranchi who\n                                                                  prescribed me to\n                                                                  favour the accused\n                                                                  person in under trial\n                                                                  case RC No. 20 (a)\/\n                                                                  95 (DHN).\n35   The complaint      The CPIO was           The       CPIO     The       information\n     dated 17.10.03     directed to check      responded that     which      was     the\n     against Shri R.    receipt     register   receipt register   subject      of    the\n     N. Das was not     thereafter         a   do not show any    request           was\n     received in the    suitable reply be      entry regarding    destroyed only to\n     office of CPIO.    sent     to      the   receipt       of   shield Shri R. N.\n                        appellant.             complaint dated    Das, the then SR.\n                                               17.10.03.          PP, CBI, ACB,\n                                                                  Dhanbad who did\n                                                                  not appear in any\n                                                                  case\/ court on 12,\n                                                                  13, 14.5.2003 and\n                                                                  8.8.2003 whereas\n                                                                  salary for these\n                                                                  dates was paid to\n                                                                  him.\n37   The        CPIO    The CPIO was           The        CPIO    FAA has yet not\n     responded that     directed to check      responded that     responded          the\n     receipt register   the receipt of the     receipt register   request only to\n     of the office of   letter dated 3.9.03    showing       an   shield Shri B. B.\n     the CPIO does      and there after a      entry regarding    Mishra, thethen Dy.\n     not show the       reply be sent to       receipt of the     Inspector General\n     receipt of the     the appellant.         letter     dated   of Police, Ranchi,\n     letter     dated                          3.3.2009 which     Region Ranchi who\n     3.9.03.                                   was forwarded      prescribed me to\n                                               to the office of   favour the accused\n                                               FAA on 16.9.03.    persons in under\n                                                                  trial case C No. 20<\/span>\n                                                                  (a)\/95\/D.\n\n\n                                         12<\/span>\n<\/pre>\n
        We have also examined the issues point-wise in the hearing. On
\nquestion at No 22 SP CBI, Dhanbad Shri V.P. Arya submitted that by his
\napplication of 19-1-2004 submitted in continuation of the complaint of 16-10-
\n2003 appellant Shri Rajender Singh has withdrawn his complaint through a
\nletter of 22-1-2004. This also disposes of point No. 24.\n<\/p>\n
       Regarding question Nos. 26 and 27 CPIO Shri V.P. Arya submitted that
\nthe case at present is subjudice and disclosing the information sought by
\nappellant including a copy of his own representation will be against the
\ninterest of justice.\n<\/p>\n
       With regard to question Nos. 35 and 37 Shri Arya submitted that the
\ncomplaint had not been received and if appellant is able to submit any receipt
\nhe will renew his effort to trace the record. The question at point No. 37 is
\nalso related to the application of 3-9-03 and, therefore, answered in response
\nto question No. 26.\n<\/p>\n
       Appellant Shri Rajender Singh submitted that he had indeed withdrawn
\nthe complaint of 16.10.03 on 22.1.’04 but the complaint was never returned to
\nhim, the copy of which he is now seeking. He also admitted that he does
\nhave a copy of representation of 3-9-03 but he has sought the information
\nbecause he wishes to know the noting made on it and the manner of its
\ndisposal. He also submitted that this information has not been submitted to
\nthe trial court and, therefore, has no bearing on the prosecution of the case.\n<\/p>\n
       Finally, Shri Rajender Singh submitted that CBI is not in the practice of
\nproviding receipts to applications, hence he is not in possession of any receipt
\nof the application of 3-9-03, but has supplied a copy, whereas he is aware of
\nthe fact that an enquiry was conducted in this matter.\n<\/p>\n
                              DECISION NOTICE<\/p>\n
       Having heard the arguments and examined records we hereby direct
\nas follows:\n<\/p>\n
                                       13<\/span><\/p>\n
 i)    Notwithstanding that the complaint of 16-10-03 submitted by
\n      complainant Shri Rajender Singh has subsequently been
\n      withdrawn or not, CPIO Shri Arya has in compliance with the
\n      directions of 1st Appellate Authority checked the receipt register
\n      and found that complaint had been received but is no longer
\n      available. Although he has mentioned that enquiry to fix the
\n      responsibility with this is being conducted we have not been told
\n      of any conclusion.     Misplacement of official records without
\n      explanation is a serious breach of administrative responsibility.
\n      The DIG, CBI Shri AK Singh is directed to take serious note
\n      of this report, fix responsibility and take suitable action
\n      against the delinquent official. On the other hand, if a copy of
\n      the complaint has been traced, this may be supplied forthwith to
\n      appellant Shri Rajender Singh. This exercise will be completed
\n      within 15 days of the date of issue of this decision notice.\n<\/p>\n
ii)   On the question of exemption from disclosure u\/s 8 (1) (h)
\n      sought by CPIO with regard to question Nos. 26 and 27, this
\n      objection had not been upheld by 1st Appellate Authority Shri
\n      A.K. Singh, DIG, as he has explained in the hearing. Besides if
\n      the representation on the basis of which the matter is now under
\n      prosecution is not the property of the Court, it becomes the duty
\n      of the public authority that is holding the information to provide
\n      the same u\/s 2 (j). In this context the CPIO will now take action
\n      as per the ruling of Delhi High Court in W.P. No. 3114\/2007 in
\n      case of Bhagat Singh Vs. Chief Information Commissioner
\n      in which Ravinder Bhat J has ruled as follows:\n<\/p>\n
12. The Act is an effectuation of the right to freedom of speech
\nand expression. In an increasingly knowledge based society,
\ninformation and access to information holds the key to resources,
\nbenefits, and distribution of power. Information, more than any
\nother element, is of critical importance participatory democracy.
\nBy one fell stroke, under the Act, the make of procedures and
\nofficial barriers that had previously impeded information, has
\nbeen swept aside. The citizen and information seekers have,
\nsubject to a few exceptions, an overriding right to be given
\ninformation on matters in the possession of the state and public<\/p>\n
                               14<\/span>
\n        agencies that are covered by the Act. As is reflected in its
\n       preambular paragraphs, the enactment seeks to promote
\n       transparency, arrest corruption and to hold the government and
\n       its instrumentalities accountable to the governed. This spirit of
\n       the Act must be borne in mind while construing the provisions
\n       contained therein.\n<\/p>\n
       13     Access to information under Section 3 of the Act, is the
\n       rule and exemptions under Section 8, the exception. Section 8
\n       being a restriction on this fundamental right, must therefore is to
\n       be strictly construed. It should not be interpreted in manner as
\n       to shadow the very right self. Under Section 8,exemption from
\n       releasing information is granted if it would impede the process of
\n       investigation process cannot be a ground for refusal of the
\n       information, the authority withholding information must show
\n       satisfactory reasons as to why the release of such information
\n       would hamper the investigation process. Such reasons should
\n       be germane, and the opinion of the process being hampered
\n       should be reasonable and based on some material. Sans this
\n       consideration, Section 8(1)(h) and other such provisions would
\n       become the haven for dodging demands for information.\n<\/p>\n
              For the above reasons this information will be provided to
\n       appellant Shri Rajender Singh within 10 working days of the
\n       date of issue of this decision notice.\n<\/p>\n
       iii)   Since there is no receipt and no other documentary evidence to
\n              support the fact that the application of 3-9-03 has, in fact, been
\n              received by the then CPIO, SP, CBI, ACB, we cannot see any
\n              grounds for our interference in the response provided by CPIO
\n              with regard to question Nos. 35 and 37.\n<\/p>\n
      With this the appeal is allowed in part. Announced in the hearing. Notice
\nof this decision be given free of cost to the parties.\n<\/p>\n
(Wajahat Habibullah)
\nChief Information Commissioner
\n6-2-2009<\/p>\n
                                        15<\/span>
\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
\n6-2-2009<\/p>\n
                                     16<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission Shri Rajender Singh vs Central Bureau Of … on 6 February, 2009 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Appeal No. CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/01300 dated 19-10-2007 Right to Information Act 2005 – Section 19 Appellant: Shri Rajender Singh Respondent: Central Bureau of Investigation,(CBI) FACTS By an application of 3-5-2007 Shri Rajinder Singh of Vasant Kunj, Delhi who was […]<\/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-32453","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-central-information-commission","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"\nShri Rajender Singh vs Central Bureau Of ... on 6 February, 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-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shri Rajender Singh vs Central Bureau Of ... on 6 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-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=\"2009-02-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-18T03:55:00+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=\"25 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-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shri Rajender Singh vs Central Bureau Of … on 6 February, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-18T03:55:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009\"},\"wordCount\":4093,\"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-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009\",\"name\":\"Shri Rajender Singh vs Central Bureau Of ... on 6 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-18T03:55:00+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shri Rajender Singh vs Central Bureau Of … on 6 February, 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 Rajender Singh vs Central Bureau Of ... on 6 February, 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-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shri Rajender Singh vs Central Bureau Of ... on 6 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-02-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-18T03:55:00+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":"25 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shri Rajender Singh vs Central Bureau Of … on 6 February, 2009","datePublished":"2009-02-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-18T03:55:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009"},"wordCount":4093,"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-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009","name":"Shri Rajender Singh vs Central Bureau Of ... on 6 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-02-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-18T03:55:00+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-rajender-singh-vs-central-bureau-of-on-6-february-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shri Rajender Singh vs Central Bureau Of … on 6 February, 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\/32453","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=32453"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/32453\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=32453"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=32453"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=32453"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}