Central Information Commission
Mathura Singh vs Delhi Police on 11 July, 2018
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Baba Gang Nath Marg, Munirka,
New Delhi-110067
CIC/DEPOL/A/2017/113149
Date of Hearing : 04.07.2018
Date of Decision : 04.07.2018
Appellant/Complainant : Mr. Mathura Singh
Respondent : 1. PIO/O/o. the Dy. Commissioner
of Police, Police Control Room
2. PIO/Addl. Dy. Commissioner of
Police, West District
Through: Inspector Ashok Kumar-
SHO; ASI - Ombir Sain; SI- Om
Prakash
Information Commissioner : Shri Yashovardhan Azad
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 21.11.2016
CPIO replied on : 22.12.2016
First Appeal filed on : 10.01.2017
First Appellate Order on : 08.02.2017
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 27.02.2017
Information soughtand background of the case:
Vide RTI application dated 21.11.2016, the appellant sought the details of PCR call made on 6th of November 2016 at 23:49 through mobile number 9999389027. In this regard provide the details of attending PCR who dealt with the above complaint, the names of the Policeman and what action has been taken.
CPIO vide letter dated 22.12.2016 stated as follows:-
"It is submitted that no PCR call received on 06.11.2016 at 23.49 hrs., from mobile number 9999389027 at Police Station Khyala. However a PCR call regarding quarrel was received from G.G.S Hospital from mobile no. 8700847682 on 07.11.2016 at 12.04 AM which was marked to ASI Rawat Singh for necessary action. On receipt of above PCR call, ASI Rawat Singh reached at G.G.S Hospital and a case FIR No. 452/16 U/S 186/353/332 IPC has been registered on the statement of HC Mahavier Singh, No. 1143/W, duty constable at G.G.S. Hospital. The DD Entries and FIR Copy attached herewith. The case is pending investigation, I.O. is ASI Rawat Singh."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed first appeal dated 10.01.2017. Shri Vijay Kumar, IPS, FAA-cum-Dy. Commissioner of Police, West District, New Delhi vide order dated 08.02.2017 has upheld the reply of PIO.
Feeling aggrieved as dissatisfied, the appellant approached the Commission.
Relevant facts emerging during hearing:
Appellant is absent.
Respondent appears and states that information as available has been provided to the appellant, well within the mandated time.
Decision It has transpired from perusal of records of the case and from the averments of the Respondent that all the available information has been duly furnished to the appellant. Appellant has not appeared to buttress his case. Hence there appears no requirement for any further action in this case.
The appeal is disposed of with no further directions.
(Yashovardhan Azad) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(R.P.Grover) Designated Officer