Should permission to prosecute an officer to CBI be put in public domain?
The Andhra Pradesh government had allowed the CBI to prosecute two officials related to Emaar scam but the request of CBI for permission to prosecute IAS officer LV Subramanyam in the same case was turned down.
In reply to an application to the General Administration Department (GAD) under the Right to Information (RTI) Act which sought the documentary details regarding government’s decision on the CBI's request for prosecution, the Principal Secretary has cited the section 24 of RTI Act to deny the information to the application.
Vide notification F.No.1/3/2011-IR dated June 9, 2011 of Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), New Delhi, has placed CBI at SI.No.23 of the second schedule of the RTI Act. The RTI Act, 2005 is not applicable to the organisation placed under the second schedule of the RTI Act except to cases of corruption and human rights violation. It has been argued that the section 24 does exclude CBI from its purview in the cases of corruption and human rights violation. The CBI had charged the officers under sections of the Prevention of Corruption (PCA) Act besides the Indian Penal Code (IPC).