Can one of the legal heirs seek information about a joint bank account?
26 May, 2013Background
The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information (RTI) Act with the State Bank of India (SBI) seeking information on a joint account in which her husband was one of the account holders. She wanted to know the details of some withdrawals from the account after her husband’s death and related issues. The Public Information Officer (PIO) denied the information under section 8(1)(j) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. of the RTI Act stating that a surviving joint account holder through a lawyer has asked the bank not to divulge information about this account to anyone.
Proceedings
During the hearing before the Central Information Commission (CIC), the appellant stated that her husband had passed away and as the legal heir, she wanted to get the name of the person who had withdrawn the sum mentioned in the RTI application and the reason for making the withdrawal as shown in the withdrawal slip. The respondent stated that they denied the information under section 8(1)(j) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. of the RTI Act and they received a letter from an advocate representing the joint account holders that the information was not to be given to anyone. The appellant stated that she had provided various documents to support her right to get the information to the respondent. The respondent stated that there appears to be a family dispute and that it is the relatives of the appellant’s husband who are the joint account holders and the appellant was not an account holder in that account. The respondent also said that the appellant has not provided the succession certificate establishing the appellant as the legal heir. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) stated that the account is operated jointly with the mode of operation as any one account holder or survivor. After the death of first account holder, the account will be operated by surviving joint account holders. As if the surviving joint account holders do not give consent, the information cannot be furnished to any other person.
View of CIC
The Commission noted that the surviving joint account holder through the lawyer has already requested the branch not to divulge any information regarding the account. The CIC held that the order of the FAA will hold till the appellant establishes herself to be the successor and legal heir in the present context in conformity with the pertinent rules.
Citation: Ms. Runu Madina v. State Bank of India RBO in Decision No. CIC/DS/A/2012/000777/VS/03076
RTI Citation : RTIFI/2013/CIC/1303
Click here to view original RTI order of Court / Information Commission