Evidence related to the identification of the accused which were fixed by the Government in respect of trap cases & a copy of the relevant rules was sought - CIC directed the respondent to provide the rules if any, or provide reference to provision of law
The appellant is represented by her husband for videoconference at Chandigarh. The Public Authority is represented by none. The complaint is converted as appeal, as the complainant wanted information by way of his first appeal before the FAA.
2. Complainant through his RTI application dated 15.09.2013 had sought for information on 3 Points Viz
i) about the evidence in respect of identification of the accused, which were fixed by GOI in respect of trap cases, which is compulsory for the Prosecuting Agency to produce chargesheet against the accused in Hon’ble Court;
ii) in the absence of FINGERPRINT or Report of an expert in respect of fingerprint of the accused, whether the Prosecuting Agency has the right to produce chargesheet against the accused in the Hon’ble Court;
iii) a copy of the relevant rule in respect of evidence related to identification of the accused which were fixed by the GOI in respect of trap cases;
PIO replied by his letter dated NIL, whereby he stated that the information was in the nature of a query amounting to seeking legal advice. Being unsatisfied with the information provided, the Complainant preferred First Appeal on 10.10.2013. There is no FAA order in the file. Being unsatisfied with the response of the PIO/FAA, the Complainant has approached the Commission U/S 18 of RTI Act.
3. The appellant’s representative made his submissions. The respondent authority is not represented by any officer. The appellant’s husband, who is himself representing her, is the accused in a criminal case pending before the Court. He submitted that chargesheet was filed against him but the same did not contain the information he sought, namely, the evidence related to the identification of the accused which were fixed by the Government in respect of trap cases (redhanded bribery case). He is also asking for a copy of the relevant rule in respect of evidence relating to the identification of the accused, as it is compulsory for prosecuting him. The Respondent authority is, therefore, directed to provide the rules if any, or provide reference to provision of law, which is relevant to the request made by the appellant within 15 days from the date of receipt of the order. The complaint is disposed of.
(M. Sridhar Acharyulu)
Citation: Ms. Medha Rani v. Department of Legal Affairs in File No.CIC/SA/C/2014/000031