Information about threatening calls received from certain mobile numbers was denied u/s 8(1)(h) claiming that the matter is pending investigation and that divulging the information would impede the process of investigation - CIC: denial upheld
8 Mar, 2014
ORDER
RTI application:
1. The appellant filed an RTI application on 11.01.2013 seeking information about threatening calls received from certain mobile numbers.
2. The CPIO responded on 06.02.2013. Some information was provided to the appellant and the remaining information was denied 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. The appellant filed his first appeal on 14.02.2013 to the first appellate authority (FAA). The FAA responded on 08.03.2013 and upheld the decision of the CPIO. The appellant filed a second appeal on 01.04.2013 with the Commission.
Hearing:
3. The appellant and the respondent both participated in the hearing personally.
4. The appellant referred to her RTI application of 11.01.2013 and stated that she had sought information on 6 points and as yet she had been provided information for the points 1 and 2 only.
5. The respondent stated that in so far as point 3,4,5 and 6 are concerned, they have taken the cover 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; of the RTI Act as the matter is pending investigation and that divulging the information would impede the process of investigation.
Decision:
8. The order of the first appellate authority is upheld. The appeal is disposed of. Copy of decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Vijai Sharma)
Information Commissioner
Citation; Ms. Reena v. Delhi Police in Decision No.CIC/SS/A/2013/001314/VS/05919