Inquiry reports of Delhi Police EOW on the complaint filed against the Directors of the Indiabulls Securities Ltd, Indiabulls Financial Services Ltd and HDFC Bank was denied u/s 8(1)(h) - CIC: applicant can file application to court to obtain information
26 Oct, 2013Inquiry reports of Delhi Police EOW on the complaint filed against the Directors of the Indiabulls Securities Ltd, Indiabulls Financial Services Ltd and HDFC Bank was denied u/s 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; 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; - respondent submitted that they would disclose documents, if the appellant moves application into the court where the case is being tried and seeks the documents with the permission of the court - the appellant agreed - CIC: applicant can file application to court to obtain information
ORDER
1. The Appellant through the RTI application dated 17.2.2012 sought information relating to the inquiry reports of the Delhi Police EOW on the complaint filed against the Directors of the Indiabulls Securities Ltd., Indiabulls Financial Services Ltd and HDFC Bank in 2008, 2009 and 2010. He also asked for each and every observation and notes made by each officer during investigation etc. The appellant specifically asked 8 querries in relation to said matter.
2. CPIO vide letter no:2227/RTI/R.ACP/CBT/EOW,CRIME BRANCH, DELHI dated 12.11.20112 as follows:
“In this regard it is informed that the sought information cannot be provided at his stage as it may only impede the process of successful prosecution of accused persons but also hamper further investigation and may result in tampering /destruction of readily available relevant evidence. Hence, 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; 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 RTI Act, 2005.”
3. Aggrieved with the reply of CPIO Appellant filed a first appeal dated 14.11.2012 before the FAA in which an order has been passed by the FAA vide his order no: 581/RTI/EOW/Crime Branch dated 13.12.2012 as follows
“…I uphold the decision taken by the PIO/EOW in which he has correctly denied to provide the sought information cannot be provided at his stage as it may not only impede the process of successful prosecution of accused persons but also hamper further investigation and may result in tampering/destruction of readily available relevant evident. Hence, exempted under the provisions of u/s 8 (1) (h) of RTI Act, 2005. Whereas, in view of the above, the appeal has been duly addressed to as far as supplying of information under RTI Act, 2005 is concerned.”
4. Being aggrieved with the reply of the FAA, Appellant filed a second appeal before the commission wherein appellant states that no information has been provide to him by the CPIO.
5. During hearing, the CPIO Delhi Police (EOW) submits that the enquiries in to the complaints of the Appellant were kept in abeyance since 2009 and no conclusion and outcome has been reached. The Learned Court of Shri Gaurav Rao, MM at Saket Courts has taken cognizance of the matter u/s 200 of Cr.P.C vide his order dated 14.09.2012 and has summoned the accused persons u/s 409/420/468/471/134 IPC. The appellant also submits that the matter is sub judice before the court and due to this no information can be provided to the Appellant in view of 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; 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. The CPIO also submits that they have no objection in giving documents, if the appellant moves an application before the court where the case is being tried and seeks the documents with the permission of the court.
6. Commission observes that the RTI application of the Appellant is relating to the inquiry reports of the Delhi Police EOW on the complaint filed against the Directors of the Indiabulls Securities Ltd., Indiabulls Financial Services Ltd and HDFC Bank in 2008, 2009 and 2010. The appellant has also asked for each and every observation and notes made by each officer during investigation etc. and specifically asked 8 querries in relation to it. The CPIO states that the Respondent would have no objection in giving documents, if the appellant moves application into the court where the case is being tried and seeks the documents with the permission of the court. Shri Shivam Sharma, representing the Appellant expresses his satisfaction with the submission of the Respondent that they would have no objection in giving documents, if directed by the concerned court.
7. The appeal is disposed of on the part of the commission.
(Sushma Singh)
Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri G.S Sahota v. Delhi Police in Case No: CIC/SS/A/2013/000229