Central Information Commission
Raj Kumar Gupta vs Delhi Police on 4 December, 2023
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
के ीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग , मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली,
नई द ली New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeals No. CIC/DEPOL/A/2022/136158
CIC/DEPOL/A/2022/133144
CIC/DEPOL/A/2022/147716
CIC/DEPOL/A/2022/148358
CIC/DEPOL/A/2022/150432
CIC/DEPOL/A/2023/126703
Shri Raj Kumar Gupta ... अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, Delhi Police, Dwarka Distt. ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 04.12.2023
Date of Decision :
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
Since both the parties are same, the above mentioned cases are clubbed
together for hearing and disposal.
Case RTI Filed CPIO reply First appeal FAO 2nd Appeal
No. on received on
136158 04.03.2022 30.05.2022 10.06.2022 20.07.2022 29.07.2022
133144 06.05.2022 31.05.2022 04.06.2022 30.06.2022 12.07.2022
147716 04.03.2022 16.08.2022 22.08.2022 28.09.2022 06.10.2022
148358 27.07.2022 29.08.2022 01.09.2022 29.09.2022 11.10.2022
150432 27.07.2022 05.09.2022 06.09.2022 15.10.2022 26.10.2022
126703 24.02.2023 21.04.2023 11.05.2023 09.06.2023 16.06.2023
Information soughtand background of the case:
(1) CIC/DEPOL/A/2022/136158 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 04.03.2022 with the SPIO, Delhi Pollution Control Committee, Dept. of Environment, Govt. of NCT Delhi seeking action taken report on his letter dated 08.02.2022 related to pending investigation with respect to FIR of 2004 in Kapashera police station pertaining to the destruction of environment at the Shahbad Mohammadpur Area.Page 1 of 11
The PIO, Department of Urban Development, Govt. of NCT Delhi transferred the RTI Application to the ACP Police Headquarters, New Delhi on 24.03.2022 under Section 6(3) of RTI Act, who further forwarded it to the PIO, Dwarka District on the same date.
The CPIO/ACP, South-West District, Vasant Vihar, Delhi vide letter dated 30.05.2022 informed the Appellant that reply to his RTI application had been sent to him vide letter dated 21.04.2022, enclosing a copy of the aforesaid letter which stated as under:-
"In this regard the report received from ACP/office Vasant Kunj (As the jurisdiction of police station Kapashera & Vasant Kunj falls under the ACP Vasant Kunj) is enclosed herewith. Moreover the information about the area of Dwarka is not relates to this district. In this regard your application is already forwarded to Dwarka District."
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 10.06.2022. The FAA/DCP, South-West District, Delhi vide order dated 20.07.2022 held as under:-
"...The undersigned has carefully considered the points raised in the appeal, RTI application filed by the appellant, reply given by the PIO (Addl.DCP)/SWD vide letter No. 4121(Dy.310)/RTI Cell(D-II)/SWD, dated 30.05.2022. It is observed that the RTI application dated 04.03.2022 submitted by the appellant was received in the office of PIO/Addl. DCP/SWD for providing the information and the information was provided to the appellant by the PIO/SWD. After perusal of reply of PIO/SWD and relevant record on file, it is found that the PIO/SWD provided the relevant and available information to the appellant as per RTI Act, 2005. As per reports received from, ACP/Vasant Kunj, Sub Division and HAC/SWD the Complaint of Raj Kumar Gupta was transferred to DCP Dwarka Distt. New Delhi, through HAC/SWD vide diary No. 5651/HAC-III/SWD, dated 29.06.2022 for taking necessary action. Moreover, the instant appeal dated 10.06.2022 with RTI Application is being transferred to PIO/Dwarka district New Delhi for taking necessary action as per RTI Act-2005..."
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Hearing was scheduled after giving prior notice to the parties. Respondent was represented by HC Prakash Kumar on behalf of ACP, South West District- Sanghamitra while the Appellant was not present during the hearing.
During the course of hearing, the Respondent submitted a copy of the letter dated 19.04.2022 which had been sent to the Appellant by the Asstt. Commissioner of Police, Sub-Division, Vasant Kunj quoting as follows: there is no such type of Page 2 of 11 activity came to the notice/reported in the police station Kapashera and Vasant Kunj south. Further as and when any such type activity come to notice/reported an appropriate legal action will be taken against them. Moreover the applicant has mentioned one FIR of the year 2004 pending in the police station Kapashera but he has not mentioned FIR No. the information is not completed at this stage. Information could not be provided what is the present position of FIR. More details may be obtained from quarter concerned office.
Decision Upon perusal of records and examining the facts of the case at hand, it is noted that the Appellant's queries had been appropriately answered by the relevant custodian of information from information available on record with the public authority as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, copy whereof was placed before the Commission during the course of hearing.
Since information available on record with the public authority has been duly furnished to the Appellant and the reply is in consonance with the terms of the provisions of the RTI Act, no cause of action subsists for further action.
The appeal is disposed off accordingly.
(2) CIC/DEPOL/A/2022/133144 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 06.05.2022 seeking information on the following points regarding alleged forgery, conspiracy and cheating and land encroachment by Shri Vinay Mani Tripathi, Mrs. Mohini Tripathi, Mr. Rajinder Kumar Goel & others in connivance with each other:-
"1. As per the PGMS Grievance in new FIR No.249/2021 U/s 427/447/ 506/120B IPC PS Dwarka, Sector-23 to get action taken report by your office on our registered letter dated 12/11/2021 & 26/11/2021 photo copy enclosed.
2. As this information is very much necessary to be submitted to the Hon'ble High Court, New Delhi."
The CPIO/Addl. DCP, Dwarka District, Delhi vide letter dated 31.05.2022 replied to the Appellant as under:-
"As per record, your mentioned complaint reminder/reference dt 26.11.2021 & 12.11.2021 were received at PS Dwarka Sec-23 vide No. LC-412/SHO Sec-23/DWK dt 27.03.202 which was marked to SI Sandeep PS Dwarka Sec-23. After enquiry the same has been filed Copy of enquiry report is enclosed herewith, which is self-explanatory. Moreover FIR No. 249/21 u/s 427/447/506/120B IPC was registered PS Dwarka Sec-23, is still pending investigation with SI Krishan Gopal PS Dwarka Sec-23."Page 3 of 11
A detailed report of SI Sandeep Singh, PS Dwarka enclosed with the PIO's reply reveals as under:
"....Further the matter pertaining to the dispute, with respect to which the Report (Kalandara) was sent u/s 145 CrPC. has been amicably settled between Shri Vinay Mani Tripathi & Prashant Glass Works Pvt.Ltd. Copy of settlement Letter was filed by both the parties duly received in this PS on 15.03.2021 which was verified by both the parties before undersigned in presence of Shri Rajkumar Gupta & his Counsel Shri Rajesh Khaware. During enquiry the purchasers of the said property have also submitted copies of Five (05) registered Sale Deeds in respect to the aforesaid property which has been affirmed by present Directors of Prashant Glass Works Pvt. Ltd.
It is submitted that the investigation of Case FIR No. 305/2020 dated 13/07/2020 IUS 448:34 IPC PS Dwarka Sector 23 in the same matter is being investigated. It is further submitted that on 18/06 2021 SDM, Cant passed an order in above mention Kalandara US 145 Cr.P.C. that the Status quo is vacated on the above said disputed property on the basis of averments recorded above as Sh. Raj Kumar Gupta is no longer the authorized signatory representative of Prashant Glass Works Pvt.Ltd. Therefore, presently Shri Rajkumar Gupta has no locus left in the said matter. Hence the present complaint may be filed.."
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 04.06.2022. The FAA/DCP, Dwarka District, Delhi vide order dated 30.06.2022 upheld the reply of the CPIO.
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
A written submission dated 24.11.2023 was received from the PIO, Dwarka District reiterating the abovementioned facts.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Hearing was scheduled after giving prior notice to the parties. Respondent was represented by Insp. Dinesh Kumar on behalf of Addl. DCP, West District- Raja Banthia, Insp. Yogesh Kumar and HC Narender and ASI Naresh Kumar from the West District; while the Appellant was not present during the hearing.
Decision Perusal of records of the case at hand reveals the Respondent has duly furnished information as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, from the available on record in response to the Appellant's queries. The reply sent by the Respondent is in consonance with the terms of the provisions of the RTI Act and the Appellant has not been able to substantiate any inadequacy therein. In the given circumstances, no cause of action subsists for further action.Page 4 of 11
The appeal is disposed off accordingly.
(3) CIC/DEPOL/A/2022/147716 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 04.03.2022 with the SPIO, Delhi Pollution Control Committee, Dept. of Environment, Govt. of NCT Delhi seeking information regarding his complaint against land grabber mafia gang referring to F1(149)/Env./Estt./2415/2021/7266-7267 dated 08.02.2022 pertaining to the destruction of environment at the Shahbad Mohammadpur Area..
The PIO, MCD, New Delhi transferred the RTI Application to the PIO, Delhi Police (Hqr.) on 15.07.2022 under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005. The CPIO/Addl. DCP, Dwarka District, Delhi vide letter dated 16.08.2022 replied to the Appellant as under:-
"In-continuation to your references/reminder dated nil & 23.07.2022 received in this office dated 18.07.2022 & 29.07.2022, through speed post and through APIO/FHQ Delhi, vide his office letter No. XXIV/29/spl/ID- 3037/2022/24954-55/(D-1)[RTI]/PHQ dated 18.07.2022, on the subject cited above.
In this context, this is to inform you that the requisite information has already been sent to you vide this office letter No. 2944(AA-127/22, ID- 694/22 & Dy No. 166, 167, 188, 211, 300, 330, 401 & 432/22)/((D-1)/RTI Cell/DWD, dated 14.05.2022."
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 22.08.2022. The FAA/Dy. Commissioner of Police, South-West District, Delhi vide order dated 28.09.2022 upheld the CPIO's reply.
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
A written submission dated 23.11.2023 has been received from the PIO, Police Hqs. stating that the matter was transferred to the PIO, Dwarka and PIO, South West District.
Another written submission dated 24.11.2023 was received from the PIO, Dwarka District stating as under:
"...In this regard, your mentioned complaint dated 04.03.2022 was received PS Dwarka Sec- 23 vide ICMS No. 817605022200053 dt 07.03.2022 and R-42/SHO/Sec-23/DWK dated 09.03.2022. Which was marked to ASI Bahadur PS Dwarka Sec-23. After enquiry the same has been filed. Copy of enquiry report is enclosed herewith, which is self- explanatory,.."Page 5 of 11
The enquiry report dated 17.06.2022 of SI Krishan Gopal, PS Dwarka District indicates the following:
"..It is most respectfully submitted that the above complainant Raj Kumar Gupta filed the present complaint in which he leveled vague allegation regarding tree cutting. Complainant did not mentioned the date and place where treed were cut. Complainant was contacted on his mobile phone for joining the enquiry and he send his Counsel on his behalf namely Sh. Rajesh Kharware who stated that in the above said matter a case FIR No. 26/04 u/s 447 IPC was registered at P.S. Dwarka Sector 23 and regarding tree cutting, the Hon'ble Court already penalized to the nephew of Satprakash Rana. Matter of tree cutting already decided by the Hon'ble Court. Now, no legal action is required at this stage. So, kindly may please be filed the above complaint..."
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Hearing was scheduled after giving prior notice to the parties. Respondent was represented by ACP Vivek Maheshwari, Insp. Rajesh Kumar and ASI Madan Mohan from the Police HQ; Insp. Sunil Kumar- SHO Kapashera; ACP Sanghamitra and Insp. Yogesh Kumar and HC Narender from the West District. The Appellant was not present during the hearing.
Decision Perusal of records of the case at hand, particularly the comprehensive written submission dated 24.11.2023 placed on record by the PIO, Dwarka District, reveals that information as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, from the available on record has been duly furnished to the Appellant in response of his queries. The Appellant has not been able to substantiate the ground for filing the instant appeal nor has he appeared during the hearing to substantiate his contentions.
In the given circumstances, the Commission is not inclined to intervene in the instant matter.
The appeal is disposed off accordingly.
(4) CIC/DEPOL/A/2022/148358 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 27.07.2022 with the PIO, Delhi Police Hqr. seeking the following information:-
"To get action taken report by your office on our registered Speed Post letter dated 24/4/2019, photo copy enclosed along with copy of Authorization given to me by M/s Motiwala Foundation Charitable Trust, copy of Board Resolution dated 30/3/2019, copy of 'Rashtriya Sahara' News Paper clipping dated 18/12/2021 & copy of MAP.."Page 6 of 11
The PIO, Delhi Police Hqr. transferred the RTI Application to the PIO, Dwarka District and also to the P.S. Vasant Vihar, New Delhi on 08.08.2022 under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act.
The CPIO/Addl. DCP, Dwarka District, Delhi vide letter dated 29.08.2022 replied as under:-
"The requisite information does not relate to this district. Hence, further information i.e. action taken report on your complaint will be provided to you by PIO/South-West District."
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 01.09.2022. The FAA/DCP, Dwarka District, Delhi vide order dated 29.09.2022 held as under:-
"The undersigned has carefully considered the application filed by the appellant under RTI Act-2005, information sought by him as well as information provided by the CPIO/Dwarka District and fresh report/comment of the CPIO/DWD on the instant appeal. It has been observed that the requisite information as asked by the appellant under RTI Act-2005 was provided by the CPIO/Dwarka District, New Delhi within stipulated period. Notwithstanding, in view of the instant appeal filed by the appellant and report/comments received from CPIO/DWD, the undersigned finds that the above said matter relates to PS Dwarka Sector- 23/DWD and information provided by the CPIO/DWD is not apt & satisfactory under the provisions of RTI Act-2005. Therefore, keeping in view of the above facts &specification of instant appeal, the CPIO/DWD is directed to re-consider the RTI application of the appellant and provide correct fresh reply of Complaint Branch/DWD & PS Dwarka Sector-23 through ACP/Dwarka to the appellant within 03 weeks from the date of receipt of this order under RTI Act-2005."
Aggrieved and dissatisfied with the non-compliance of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
A written submission dated 24.11.2023 was received from the PIO, Dwarka District enclosing an enquiry report dated 16.08.2022 from SI Dhyanendra Pratap, which reveals the following status:
"It is most respectfully submitted that the above complainant Raj Kumar Gupta filed the present complaint in which he leveled vague allegation regarding tree cutting. Complainant did not mentioned the date and place where treed were cut. Complainant was contacted on his mobile phone for joining the enquiry and he send his counsel on his behalf namely Sh. Rajesh Kharware who stated that in the above said matter a case FIR No. 26/04 u/s 447-IPC was registered at P.S Dwarka sector -23 and regarding tree cutting the Hon'ble Curt already penalized to the nephew of Satprakash Rana. Matter of tree cutting already decided by the Hon'ble Page 7 of 11 Court. Now no legal action is required at this stage. So kindly may please be filed the above complaint.."
Another written submission dated 23.11.2023 has been received from the PIO, Police Hqs. stating that the matter was transferred to the PIO, Dwarka and PIO, South West District.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Hearing was scheduled after giving prior notice to the parties. Respondent was represented by ACP Vivek Maheshwari, Insp. Rajesh Kumar and ASI Madan Mohan from the Police HQ; ACP Sanghamitra and Insp. Yogesh Kumar and HC Narender from the West District. The Appellant was not present during the hearing.
Decision Perusal of records of the case at hand, particularly the comprehensive and self explanatory written submission dated 24.11.2023 placed on record by the PIO, Dwarka District, reveals that information as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, has been duly furnished to the Appellant in response of his queries, from the available record. The Appellant has not been able to substantiate the ground for filing the instant appeal nor has he appeared during the hearing to argue his case. In the given circumstances, the Commission finds that no cause of action survives in this case which requires intervention in the instant matter.
The appeal is disposed off accordingly.
(5) CIC/DEPOL/A/2022/150432 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 27.07.2022 with the PIO, Delhi Police Headquarters seeking action taken report on their registered Speed Post letter dated 24/4/2019, photo copy enclosed along with copy of Authorization given to me by M/s Motiwala Foundation Charitable Trust, copy of Board Resolution dated 30/3/2019, copy of 'Rashtriya Sahara' News Paper clipping dated 18/12/2021 & copy of MAP."
The PIO, Delhi Police Hqr. transferred the RTI Application to the PIO, South West Distt. on 02.08.2022 under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act with due intimation to the Appellant.
The CPIO/Addl. DCP, South-West District, Delhi vide letter dated 05.09.2022 replied to the Appellant by stating as under:-
"As per report received, the same was received in Police station Kapashera and the same is pending enquiry with EO. Hence, the requisite information cannot be provided under section 8(1)(h) of RTI Act-2005."Page 8 of 11
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 06.09.2022. The FAA/Dy. Commissioner of Police, South-West District, Delhi vide order dated 15.10.2022 directed the CPIO as under -
".... the CPIO (Addl. DCP/SWD) is directed to reconsider the RTI- request on the above said point and a comprehensive information be provided to the appellant within 3 weeks from the date of receipt of this order as per RTI Act, 2005.
The appeal is disposed off with the above discussion."
Aggrieved and dissatisfied with the non-compliance of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
A written submission dated 23.11.2023 has been received from the PIO, Police Hqs. stating that the matter was transferred to the PIO, Dwarka and PIO, South West District.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Hearing was scheduled after giving prior notice to the parties. Respondent was represented by ACP Vivek Maheshwari, Insp. Rajesh Kumar and ASI Madan Mohan from the Police HQ; ACP Sanghamitra from the South West District and Insp. Sunil Kumar - SHO, Kapashera. The Appellant was not present during the hearing.
During the course of hearing, the Respondent from South West district contended that response in the form of action taken report had been duly sent to the Appellant vide letter dated 25.10.2022. A copy of the said reply dated 25.10.2022 enclosing the action taken report dated 16.09.2022 by Insp. Investigation has been placed on record by the Respondent during the course of hearing.
Decision The reply dated 25.10.2022 submitted by the Respondent from the South West District did not form a part of the Appeal filed by the Appellant. It is also noted that the action taken report dated 16.09.2022 annexed with the PIO's reply dated 25.10.2022 is illegible, since the print thereof is partially faded.
In the light of the above fact, the Respondent is hereby directed to send a copy of the reply dated 25.10.2022 and a legible copy of the report dated 16.09.2022, within two weeks of receipt of this order.
The aforementioned appeal is decided on the above terms.
(6) CIC/DEPOL/A/2023/126703 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 24.02.2023 seeking information related to property Khasra No. 273/2, Min, in the name of company M/s Prashant Glass Works Pvt. Ltd.
Page 9 of 11The CPIO/Addl. DCP, Dwarka District, Delhi vide letter dated 21.04.2023replied as under:-
"It is pertinent to mention here that the capacity of the PIO to provide information under the Act is limited. Only such information can be supplied which already exists and is held by the public authority or held under the control of the public authority which relates to you. The PIO is not supposed to create information; or to interpret information; or to solve the problems raised by the applicant. Moreover, you may give your complaint to concern senior officers."
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 11.05.2023. The FAA/Dy. Commissioner of Police, Dwarka District, Delhi vide order dated 09.06.2023held as under:-
"....In view of the specification mentioned in the instant appeal and after giving the relief to the appellant, copy of complaint ref. No. 13051/C/DWD dated 07.07.2021 along with action taken report is again being furnished to the appellant, which is self- contained. However, appellant may inspect the relevant admissible & permissible record of Complaint Branch/DWD, on any working day from 10.00 A.M. to 04.00 P.M. & obtain copy of requisite information which relates to you under the provision of RTI Act within one month of instant order, if so desire. You are requested to bring your identity proof at the time of inspect the record & obtaining the requisite documents. Apart from this, the appellant is further advised that he may file a separate detailed request/application before appropriate/concern authority for the redressal of his rest grievances."
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Hearing was scheduled after giving prior notice to the parties. Respondent was represented by ACP Vivek Maheshwari, Insp. Rajesh Kumar and ASI Madan Mohan from the Police HQ; Insp. Yogesh Kumar and HC Narender. The Appellant was represented by Shri Rajesh Khaware, Advocate during the hearing.
Decision:
Upon perusal of records it is noted that the Appellant has sought proper forensic investigation of two cross FIRs for trespassing land situated at Shahabad Mohammadpur, New De!hi-110061 in Khasra Ni,o.27312, Min, in the name of company M/s Prashant Glass Works Pvt. Ltd. Since the Appellant has not sought information as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, therefore, the instant case cannot be adjudicated under the RTI Act.
The appeal is disposed off accordingly.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालालसाम रया) हीरालालसाम रया Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) Page 10 of 11 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . िचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 11 of 11