Information regarding a case filed against the appellant on the basis of some allegations made by the Inspector of Police, CBI was denied u/s 8(1)(a), (g) & (h) - CIC noted that the records have since been weeded out & issued a Show Cause Notice to PIO
20 Dec, 2017O R D E R
1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), New Delhi seeking information on six points regarding a case which was filed against him in the Court of the Hon’ble Principal Sessions Judge for CBI cases, Chennai on the basis of some allegations made by the Inspector of Police, Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)/ACB/ Chennai, including, inter alia (i) a copy of the proposal sent by the Superintendent of Police Special Unit, CBI, Chennai requesting permission from the Union Home Secretary, MHA, New Delhi- under Section 5 (2) of the Telegraph Act 1885, for intercepting the mobile numbers 944****506 and 944****494 and (ii) the copies of the orders passed by the Union Home Secretary or the Appropriate Authority granting the permission to intercept the mobile numbers 944****506 and 944****494.
2. The appellant filed a second appeal before the Commission on the grounds that he was not satisfied with the reply provided by the CPIO, wherein the desired information was denied under Sections 8 (1) (a), (g) & (h) of the RTI Act. The appellant is also aggrieved with the Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA), which upheld the CPIO’s reply. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the information sought for by him excluding the names and identities of the officials who had passed the order for intercepting the mobiles and the names of the officials who were involved in this issue.
Hearing:
3. The appellant, Shri S. Durga Prasad attended the hearing through video conferencing. The respondent Shri Shailendra Vikram Singh, DGM, MHA was present in person.
4. The appellant submitted that the CPIO had wrongly denied information on the grounds that the same is not disclosable under Sections 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; , (g) and (h) of the RTI Act. The appellant stated that the case against him had been registered under ‘The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988’. Hence, 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 does not apply in this case. Further, he is not seeking the names of the officers involved in the interception. Hence, Section 8(1)(g) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; of the RTI Act is also not relevant. The appellant also stated that the investigation into the matter had also been completed. Hence, in view of the ratio laid down by the CIC’s Decision No. CIC/SM/A/2011/000308/SG dated 21.06.2011, the information sought by him should be provided.
5. The respondent submitted that the FAA vide order dated 20.05.2016 had informed the appellant that the lawful interception/phone tapping can be done by the Law Enforcement Agencies, duly authorized by the Central and State Government, in the interests of sovereignty, and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with Foreign States or public order or for preventing incitement to the commission of an offence as per the provisions of Section 5(2) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. Therefore, it is done under classified legal regime, and the documents/ information related to lawful interception are classified as Top Secret and cannot be disclosed as it is exempted from disclosure under Sections 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; , 8(1)(g) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; and 8 (1)(h) of the RTI Act. Further, the CBI is exempted from disclosing information 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, 2005 as it is listed in the Second Schedule of the RTI Act. The respondent in response to the appellant’s averment that Sections 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; , 8(1)(g) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; and 8 (1)(h) of the RTI Act are not applicable in the case stated that the information sought by the appellant pertained to the year 2016, and the records pertaining to the information sought by the appellant were not accessible, as the same have been weeded out as per the Record Retention Schedule. On a query, the respondent submitted that the records pertaining to the period up to December are weeded out in June, and the records up to June are weeded out in December.
6. The appellant submitted that the interception was done with effect from 23.12.2015 (944****949) and 01.01.2016 (944****506). Thus, the records could not have been weeded out on the date of RTI application (01.04.2016) as well as on the date of the first appeal (13.05.2016).
Decision:
7. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and perusing the records, observes that the respondent could not justify that the appellant’s case related to the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, etc. In view of this, it cannot be said that the information sought could be classified 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 also could not establish how the disclosure of the information sought would impede the prosecution of offenders. Thus, the CPIO wrongly invoked exemption Sections 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; , 8(1)(g) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; and 8 (1)(h) of the RTI Act. The Commission, therefore, directs the Registry of this Bench to issue a Show Cause Notice to the CPIO, MHA for explaining as to why action under Section 20(1) Where the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, at the time of deciding any complaint or appeal is of the opinion that the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, has, without any reasonable cause, refused to receive an application for information or has not furnished information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of section 7 or malafidely denied the request for information or knowingly given incorrect, incomplete or misleading information or destroyed information which was the subject of the request or obstructed in any manner in furnishing the information, it shall impose a penalty of two hundred and fifty rupees each day till application is received or information is furnished, so however, the total amount of such penalty shall not exceed twenty-five thousand rupees: Provided that the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard before any penalty is imposed on him: Provided further that the burden of proving that he acted reasonably and diligently shall be on the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be. of the RTI Act should not be initiated against him. The Commission, also notes that the records have since been weeded out. Hence, the information sought by the appellant cannot be provided to him now.
8. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of. 9. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
(Sudhir Bhargava)
Information Commissioner
Citation: S. Durga Prasad v. CPIO, Ministry of Home Affairs in Decision No. CIC/SB/A/2016/001082, dated 13.10.2017