Information pertaining to appellant’s complaint regarding fraudulent withdrawal of money from his saving bank account at ING Vysya Bank was denied u/s 8(1)(h) - CIC: Not established how disclosure would impede the process of investigation; Provide it
17 Mar, 2016ORDER
1. Shri Devashish Chandra Tewari filed an application dated 25.03.2014 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), North West District, Delhi Police seeking information on twelve points pertaining to his complaint regarding fraudulent withdrawal of money from his saving bank account at ING Vysya Bank, Model Town, Delhi including
(i) whether a complaint DD No. 62.B dated 08.02.2014 was received at P.S. Model Town, Delhi ,
(ii) if yes, was an Investigating Officer designated to deal with the said complaint, please supply his name, batch No. and designation,
(iii) the action taken by the said I.O. in respect of the said complaint from the time of lodging of the complaint i.e., 08.02.2014 till the evening of 13th February, 2014 along with the documentary evidence including file notings of action taken by the I.O.
2. The complainant filed the complaint dated 13.05.2014 before the Commission on the ground that he has not been provided information by the C.P.I.O. taking exemption under Section 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; of the RTI Act, 2005 on the plea that this would impede the process of investigation and the First Appellant Authority (FAA) too did not respond to his appeal. The appellant requested the Commission to assist him in procuring the desired information.
Hearing:
3. The complainant Shri Devashish Chandra Tewary was not present despite notice. The respondents Shri R.K. Tyagi, ACP, Model Town, Delhi Police and Prem Kishore Gupta, SubInspector (Appeals), North West District, Delhi Police was present in person.
4. The respondents submitted that the appellant was informed vide letter dated 21.04.2014 that investigation in the matter is still pending. Hence, information cannot be provided as it would impede the process of investigation and is exempted under Section 8(1)(h) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders; of the RTI Act.
Decision:
5. The Commission observes that the appellant is seeking information regarding the complaint filed by him. Further, the Commission observes that the respondent has not been able to establish how disclosure of information would impede the process of investigation. The Commission, therefore, directs the CPIO to provide information to the complainant within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6. With the above observation, the complaint is disposed of.
7. Copy of decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Sudhir Bhargava)
Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri Devashish Chandra Tewary v. Delhi Police in Decision No. CIC/VS/C/2014/900289/SB