Disclosure of security provided to an individual under RTI

Background        

The appellant sought information regarding security provided to Dr. Praveen Gupta

by the police department like, the names of officials who had gone at the residence of the Dr. Praveen Gupta for his security during last six months, whom did they meet, the proof of their going at the residence, whether they have marked Daily Diary entries or any report was written regarding the matter. He also asked about the number of van/gypsy used as PCR Police Post in Delhi Police and how many cases have been registered by them.  He desired a copy of the guidelines in respect of security arrangement of people, special citizen, officers, VIP by Delhi Police and some other matters. The appellant also referred to a matter ‘a guideline on media is under process before the Delhi High Court’; regarding this he sought the copy of documents and guidelines submitted by the Department before the High Court. The Public Information officer (PIO) provided some information and transferred the rest of the queries to the PIO, Police Control Room (PCR) and the PIO, Police Head Quarter (PHQ). The appellant filed the first-appeal before First Appellate Authority (FAA), PHQ. The FAA remitted the matter to the PIO, North West Division (NWD) with the directions to consider the points mentioned by the appellant in his appeal and provide the relevant information as permissible under RTI Act. On the directions of the FAA, the PIO provided some additional information but denied the copy of documents and guidelines submitted by the Department before the High Court under section 8(1)(b) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which has been expressly forbidden to be published by any court of law or tribunal or the disclosure of which may constitute contempt of court; of the RTI Act stating that the matter is under the consideration of the High Court of Delhi.

View of CIC

The Central Information Commission (CIC) observed that requisite has been provided to the appellant by the respondent. The Commission directed the PIO to provide the requisite information regarding the number of van/gypsy used as PCR Police Post in Delhi Police and how many cases have been registered by them.

Citation: Mr. Vinay Gupta v. Delhi Police, North West District in Case No. CIC/SS/A/2011/000747