{"id":53540,"date":"2010-04-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-04-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010"},"modified":"2016-09-12T12:15:40","modified_gmt":"2016-09-12T06:45:40","slug":"mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010","title":{"rendered":"Mr.Krishan Goenka vs Cbi on 21 April, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Central Information Commission<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Mr.Krishan Goenka vs Cbi on 21 April, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>                  CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION\n              Appeal No. CIC\/WB\/A\/2009\/000200 dated 25-2-2009\n                Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19\n\nAppellant:          Shri Krishan Goenka.\nRespondent:         Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)\n                      Decision announced on: 21.4.2010\n\n\nFACTS<\/pre>\n<p>      By an application of 25-9-2008 Shri Krishan Goenka of Defence Colony,<br \/>\nNew Delhi applied to the CPIO, CBI seeking the following information:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>      &#8220;That vide your letter no. DP\/CAE\/2008\/841\/RTI\/CBI\/EOW\/-Kol<br \/>\n      dated 2.9.08 you have provided letter dated 24.7.2002 of Shri<br \/>\n      Kantibhai Damani having sold the cheated\/ disputed consignment<br \/>\n      to 35 different parties along with their names and full particulars.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      In view of the above, the applicant requests that he may be<br \/>\n      provided information as to how the said letter of Kanti Bhai Damani<br \/>\n      dated 24.7.2008 was disposed off and also provide the copies of<br \/>\n      office notings in respect thereof.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>      To this Shri Krishan Goenka received a response from CPIO, SP, CBI Shri<br \/>\nSanjay Jain dated 23-10-08 informing him as follows:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>       &#8220;Regarding provisions of law, as sought by you, it is stated that<br \/>\n       under Right to Information, you are having right to such information<br \/>\n       which is held by\/or under the control of any public authority and the<br \/>\n       same includes the right to:-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<pre>(i)           inspection of work, documents, records;\n(ii)          taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or\nrecords.\n(iii)         Taking certified samples of material;\n(iv)          Obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies,\n<\/pre>\n<blockquote><p>tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts<br \/>\nwhere such information is stored in a computer or in any other device.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      The provision of law, as sought by you vide your letter dated<br \/>\n      22.9.2008 does not come in any of the above noted categories. As<br \/>\n      such, the undersigned is not duty bound to furnish the same.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      Regarding document\/ information as sought by you, it is stated that<br \/>\n      the questioned case i.e. RC.2\/E\/2000-Kol. Has been charge<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                        1<\/span><br \/>\n       sheeted before the Court of Ld. Spl. CJM (CBI), Bhubaneshwar and<br \/>\n      you are a charge sheeted accused person in the said case Section<br \/>\n      207 of Cr.P.C. 1973 clearly lays down the detail of report\/<br \/>\n      documents, which, a charge sheeted accused person is entitled to<br \/>\n      get. The documents\/ report, as has been laid down u\/s 207 Cr.P.C.<br \/>\n      has been supplied to you long back. The undersigned is not duty<br \/>\n      bound\/ authorised to supply\/ furnish any information\/ documents,<br \/>\n      other than the documents specified u\/s 207 Cr.P.C. in respect of a<br \/>\n      case which is under trial, to any person without the clear cut<br \/>\n      direction of the Court trying the questioned case. That apart u\/s 8<br \/>\n      (1) (h) of Right to Information Act, 2005, the undersigned has been<br \/>\n      provided with exemption from disclosing such information which<br \/>\n      has been sought by you vide your letters dated 23.9.2008 and<br \/>\n      25.9.2008.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>      Shri Krishan Goenka then made an appeal before the DIG, CBI (EOW)<br \/>\nDelhi Region dated 5-11-08 pleading as follows:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>      &#8220;The applicant submits that he has requested for an information<br \/>\n      which is in sequel to the information already provided to him and<br \/>\n      thus the same does not fall u\/s 207 Cr. P. C. The appellant also<br \/>\n      submits that if the said information is provided by the respondent,<br \/>\n      the same will facilitate the process of law.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>      Upon this Shri Y.C. Modi, Jt. Director, CBI (EOW-III), New Delhi has<br \/>\ndecided as follows:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>      &#8220;On receipt of the said letter, due importance was given to the facts<br \/>\n      and circumstances mentioned in the said letter and after taking the<br \/>\n      same into consideration as well as evidence collected during the<br \/>\n      course of investigation, Supplementary Report under the provision<br \/>\n      of section 173 (8) Cr. P.C. was duly filed in the Court of the Ld.<br \/>\n      ACJM. CBI Bhubaneshwar, Orissa who was pleased to take<br \/>\n      cognizance on the same.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      It is further to be mentioned that Section 172 of Cr.P.C. deals with<br \/>\n      Case Diaries and Sub-section (3) of Section 173 Cr.P.C. does not<br \/>\n      entitle the accused or his agents to call for such diaries. Section<br \/>\n      172 (3) lays down &#8216;Neither the accused nor his agents shall be<br \/>\n      entitled to call for such diaries, nor shall he or they be entitled to<br \/>\n      see them merely because they are referred to by the Court, but if<br \/>\n      they are used by the police officer who made them to refresh his<br \/>\n      memory, or if the Court uses them for the purpose of contradicting<br \/>\n      such police officer, the provisions of section 161 or section 145, as<br \/>\n      the case may be, of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872) shall<br \/>\n      apply.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                        2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>        Shri Krishan Goenka then approached this Commission in second appeal<br \/>\nwith the following prayer:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>      &#8220;In the facts and circumstances explained herein above and in the<br \/>\n      interest      of justice, this Hon&#8217;ble Commission may be pleased<br \/>\n      to:-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>(a)          set aside the Orders dated 23.10.2008 &amp; 22.11.2008 of the<br \/>\nrespondents No. 1 &amp; 2 respectively.\n<\/p>\n<p>(b)          Issue orders for providing a copy of the Note Sheets with<br \/>\nrespect to how the said letter dated 24.7.2002 of Shri Kanti Bhai Damani<br \/>\nwas dealt by the CBI or in the alternative a copy of the comments of the<br \/>\ncompetent authority on the receipted correspondence.\n<\/p>\n<p>(c)          Pass any other and further Order(s), as this Hon&#8217;ble<br \/>\nAppellate Authority may deem fit and proper.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>       The appeal was heard through videoconference on 21-4-2010. The<br \/>\nfollowing are present.\n<\/p>\n<p>       Appellant at CIC chambers:\n<\/p>\n<p>       Shri Krishan Goenka<br \/>\n       Shri S.K. Sharma<br \/>\n       Respondents at NIC Studio (Kolkata)<br \/>\n       Ms. Suman Bala Sahu, T. Director, EOW<br \/>\n       Shri A.R. Botha, S.P. (EOW)<\/p>\n<p>       In the meantime SP, CBI (EOW) had contacted the Registry to submit that<br \/>\nthe issue raised by the appellant has been disposed of by this Commission in<br \/>\nappeal No. CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/00462.         In that case, however, we find that the<br \/>\ninformation sought by Shri Goenka was as follows:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>       &#8220;That in the facts and circumstances as stated above, the applicant<br \/>\n       herein seeks details\/ reasons for not filing supplementary charge<br \/>\n       sheet against Kanti Bhai Damani and other 35 parties. Because IO<br \/>\n       Shri Sanjay Sen took the permission from Ld. ACJM to investigate<br \/>\n       role of Kanti Bhai Damani as also to discover END-USE of disputed<br \/>\n       consignment which was allowed under section 173 (8) of Cr. PC by<br \/>\n       Ld. ACJM Strangely after mysterious death of late Ashwini Kumar<br \/>\n       Goenka Managing Director of Savitri India Ltd. on 15.4.2003, IO<br \/>\n       Shri Sanjay Sen filed closure\/ final report and sought dispensation<br \/>\n       of further investigation in the matter under Section 173 (8) of Cr. PC<br \/>\n       granted previously. Further I is on record that not a single<br \/>\n       statement has been recorded from the buyers of disputed<br \/>\n       consignment regarding mode of payment also I.O. miserably failed<br \/>\n       to bring on record statements from buyers or Kanti Bhai Damani or<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         3<\/span><br \/>\n          staff of Savitri India Ltd as to how the payment received from<br \/>\n         disputed consignment was parked or who was the actual<br \/>\n         beneficiary leaving behind a bigger question that without recovery<br \/>\n         or name of beneficiary can a criminal trial stand on test of law?&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>         In that case this Commission had decided that the matter is outside the<br \/>\njurisdiction of this Commission, since the issue was an allegedly faulty charge-<br \/>\nsheet.     In the present case, on the other hand, the request is purely for<br \/>\ninformation.\n<\/p>\n<p>         Shri A.R. Both, SP, CBI (EOW), Kolkata stated that as discussed in the<br \/>\nhearing in the earlier case even after the charge-sheet had been submitted<br \/>\ninvestigation had been kept open to take into account Shri Damani&#8217;s role after<br \/>\nwhich a supplementary charge-sheet had been filed exonerating Shri Damani.<br \/>\nOn the specific question asked by appellant Shri Goenka in the present case Shri<br \/>\nBoth submitted that the letter of Shri Damani had been written to the I.O. and not<br \/>\nto any senior officer of the EOW, CBI. Hence, there were, in fact, no notings but<br \/>\nthe issue has been included in the case diary which is before the court and<br \/>\ncannot be shared with the appellant under the law.\n<\/p>\n<p>         Shri Both further submitted that a copy of Shri Damani&#8217;s letter has already<br \/>\nbeen provided to Shri Goenka.         Appellant Shri Goenka on the other hand<br \/>\nsubmitted that the letter from Shri Damani is not part of the case diary since he<br \/>\nhas been given a copy which could not have been done, had it been a part of the<br \/>\ncase diary. He submitted that the CPIO &amp; Jt. Director have taken different stands\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8211; one taking recourse to the Cr. P.C. and the other to the RTI. This was disputed<br \/>\nby respondent Shri Botha contending that even though reference had been made<br \/>\nto both Cr. P.C. and RTI there was no contradiction to the stand taken at any<br \/>\nlevel in disposing of the application of Shri Goenka.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                    DECISION NOTICE<br \/>\n         The information sought in the present case is comprised of two<br \/>\ncomponents<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                          4<\/span>\n<\/p>\n<p>           (i)    the manner of disposal of the letter of Shri Kanti Bhai Damani and\n<\/p>\n<p>          (ii)   copies of office notings in respect thereof.\n<\/p>\n<p>          From what has been discussed in the hearing it is quite clear that the<br \/>\nanswers to the two questions are as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>   (i)           the letter of Shri Kanti Bhai Damani has been disposed of by<br \/>\n                 including a reference to it in the case diary;\n<\/p>\n<p>   (ii)          there are no office notings on the subject.\n<\/p>\n<p>                 Under the circumstances the questions asked by appellant Shri<br \/>\nKrishan Goenka in his application now stand fully answered. On the other hand,<br \/>\nit is not understood on what grounds SP, CBI, EOW has in answer to this<br \/>\nstraightforward question taken the stand that he has in his response of 23-10-08<br \/>\nto the RTI application, which is obfuscatory and seeks to rely on Section 207 of<br \/>\nCr. P.C. to refuse information, which to our mind has no bearing on the subject.<br \/>\nHe has also sought to take refuge u\/s 8 (1) (h) of the RTI Act without in any way<br \/>\nclarifying as to how the disclosure of this information was going to impede the<br \/>\ninvestigation or indeed the prosecution of any case.\n<\/p>\n<p>          We can, therefore, only come to the conclusion that both the CPIO and<br \/>\nAppellate Authority have in this case taken recourse to obfuscation in a matter<br \/>\nthat required a simple response, which has now been provided. The appeal is<br \/>\nthus allowed and information sought by appellant Shri Krishan Goenka has also<br \/>\nbeen provided.        However, because of the obfuscation resorted to by the<br \/>\nEconomic Offences Wing of CBI in responding to this application, the then CPIO<br \/>\nShri Sanjay Jain, SP, CBI will show cause in writing as to why he should not be<br \/>\nheld liable for a penalty of Rs. 25,000\/- for having malafide denied the request for<br \/>\ninformation by knowingly misquoting the law to obfuscate the answer to the<br \/>\nrequest. Shri Sanjay Jain will send his written explanation within 15 days from<br \/>\nthe date of receipt of this decision notice to Shri Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar, Dy.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                             5<\/span><\/p>\n<p> Secretary and Jt. Registrar, CIC, failing which this Commission will consider<br \/>\nfurther steps that may be required u\/s 20 of the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>       Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to<br \/>\nthe parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>(Wajahat Habibullah)<br \/>\nChief Information Commissioner<br \/>\n21-4-2010<\/p>\n<p>Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against<br \/>\napplication and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of<br \/>\nthis Commission.\n<\/p>\n<p>(Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar)<br \/>\nJoint Registrar<br \/>\n21-4-2010<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         6<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Central Information Commission Mr.Krishan Goenka vs Cbi on 21 April, 2010 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Appeal No. CIC\/WB\/A\/2009\/000200 dated 25-2-2009 Right to Information Act 2005 &#8211; Section 19 Appellant: Shri Krishan Goenka. Respondent: Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) Decision announced on: 21.4.2010 FACTS By an application of 25-9-2008 Shri Krishan Goenka of Defence Colony, New Delhi [&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-53540","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-central-information-commission","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Mr.Krishan Goenka vs Cbi on 21 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mr.Krishan Goenka vs Cbi on 21 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-04-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-09-12T06:45:40+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mr.Krishan Goenka vs Cbi on 21 April, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-12T06:45:40+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1808,\"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\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010\",\"name\":\"Mr.Krishan Goenka vs Cbi on 21 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-12T06:45:40+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mr.Krishan Goenka vs Cbi on 21 April, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Mr.Krishan Goenka vs Cbi on 21 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mr.Krishan Goenka vs Cbi on 21 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-04-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-09-12T06:45:40+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mr.Krishan Goenka vs Cbi on 21 April, 2010","datePublished":"2010-04-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-12T06:45:40+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010"},"wordCount":1808,"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\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010","name":"Mr.Krishan Goenka vs Cbi on 21 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-04-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-12T06:45:40+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-krishan-goenka-vs-cbi-on-21-april-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mr.Krishan Goenka vs Cbi on 21 April, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/53540","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=53540"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/53540\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=53540"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=53540"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=53540"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}