Central Information Commission
Jagsir Singh vs Cbi on 4 May, 2022
Author: Saroj Punhani
Bench: Saroj Punhani
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग , मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/CBRUI/A/2020/133845
Jagsir Singh ......अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Central Bureau of Investigation,
Anti-Corruption Branch, RTI Cell,
Sector-30A, Chandigarh - 160030. .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 15/02/2022
Date of Decision : 27/04/2022
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 28/07/2020
CPIO replied on : 20/08/2020
First appeal filed on : 19/08/2020
First Appellate Authority's order : 28/09/2020
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 22/10/2020
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 28.07.2020 seeking the following information:
1
"Copy of file concerned with My complaint dated 10.12.2018 & Action Taken regarding this complaint against Sh. Vikramjit Singh (Inspector) up to Challan presented in Competent Court if presented or States of case, if Challan not presented, as my life & liability is under threat due to fake complaints by certain conspirators, with state Punjab Police Dept."
The CPIO replied to the appellant on 20.08.2020 stating as follows:-
"...........RTI application filed by you is not specific & General in nature, hence required information cannot be provided to you."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 19.08.2020. FAA's order dated 28.09.2020 upheld the reply of CPIO. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, theappellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through audio conference. Respondent: Raj Singh, Addll. SP & Rep. of CPIO present through audio conference.
The Appellant stated that he is aggrieved with the non-receipt of the information from the CPIO and narrated the factual background of the complaint referred to in the RTI Application to allege that a corrupt officer has been reinstated in service while he has been left to fend for himself, while they both worked on the same case.
The CPIO submitted that the information sought for in the RTI Application is not very specific and it does not contain any allegation of corruption.
Since the case background was not clear from the averments of the Appellant, the CPIO was asked to clarify the same. The CPIO explained that the complaint under reference was filed against the averred person by the Appellant, in pursuance of which a tarp was laid down by the CBI and the officer was caught red handed taking/accepting cash and accordingly, a case was pursued, which is as on date at prosecution stage in the Special CBI Court, Mohali.2
Decision:
The Commission having heard the submissions of the parties observes that the information sought for in the RTI Application pertains to allegations of corruption and therefore attracts the proviso to Section 24(1) of the RTI Act. The CPIO is therefore directed to provide a revised reply to the RTI Application enumerating the date-wise action taken details of the averred complaint and state the present- day status of the case in writing. The said revised reply shall be provided to the Appellant by the CPIO within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order under due intimation to the Commission.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Saroj Punhani (सरोजपुनहािन) हािन) Information Commissioner (सूचनाआयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स#यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक / 3