Appellant wanted a copy of the report submitted by the Inspector of the RPF claiming that a serious allegation of terrorism has been levelled against him - CIC: inform about the conclusions arrived at in the report pertaining specifically to the appellant
23 Sep, 2014ORDER
RTI Application:
1. The appellant filed an RTI application dated 22.11.2012 seeking copy of report of communication pertaining to terrorism submitted by Inspector. The PIO responded on 29.11.2012 and denied information under section 8(1) (a) of RTI Act. Not satisfied with the reply, the appellant filed an appeal dated 07.12.2012 with the First Appellate Authority (FAA). The FAA responded on 21.12.2012 and upheld the reply of PIO. Aggrieved with the reply, the appellant filed a second appeal dated 09.01.2013 with the Commission.
Hearing:
2. The appellant and respondent both participated in the hearing through video conferencing.
3. The appellant referred to his RTI application dated 22.11.2012 and reiterated the 3 points made in his RTI application. The appellant stated that he wants a copy of the report dated 15.07.2012 which was submitted by the Inspector of the RPF for which he gave both the date and reference number. The appellant stated that he wants a copy of the report because a serious allegation of terrorism has been levelled against him.
4. The respondent stated that the report was confidential in nature as it was a report of Special Intelligence Branch pertaining to terrorism. The respondent said that the copy of the report cannot be provided as it is exempted under section 8(1)(a) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or lead to incitement of an offence; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or lead to incitement of an offence; of the RTI Act. The respondent further stated that the respondent organization works in close proximity with other Intelligence Agencies and though RPF is not exempted under section 24(1) Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the intelligence and security organisations specified in the Second Schedule, being organisations established by the Central Government or any information furnished by such organisations to that Government: Provided that the information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under this sub-section: of the RTI Act, but because of the very nature of the report it was confidential, hence they sought exemption under 8(1)(a) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or lead to incitement of an offence; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or lead to incitement of an offence; of the RTI Act.
5. The respondent said that the report is based on the findings of the Special Intelligence Branch which collected information pertaining to terrorism and subversive activities, which is shared with other intelligence agencies.
6. The appellant stated that he has been branded as a member of a terrorist organization and that is why he wanted a copy of the report.
7. The appellant stated that the inquiry is over and report is already submitted and respondent may provide the information to the appellant. The appellant in the course of the hearing stated that for his safety and of his family members in future, he wanted a copy of the report. The appellant stated that he is particularly concerned about the allegations that were made against him and in this context he wanted to know the final conclusion and reasoning of the inquiry report.
8. What emerged from the hearing was that the respondent will inform the appellant about the findings taking into account that the respondent organization is not included in the Second Schedule (reference section 24) of the RTI Act.
Decision:
9. The respondent is directed to inform the appellant, within 30 days of this order, about the conclusions arrived at in the report pertaining specifically to the appellant. The appeal is disposed of. Copy of the decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Vijai Sharma)
Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri Shahansha Firoz Khan v. Dy. Chief Security Commissioner/RPF, Eastern Railway in Decision No. CIC/AD/A/2013/000372/VS/07335