Central Information Commission
Ashish Bali vs Delhi Police on 1 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 Appeal No. CIC/DEPOL/A/2022/135212
Shri Ashish Bali ... अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, Delhi Police Outer District ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 30.11.2023
Date of Decision : 01.12.2023
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 05.05.2022
PIO replied on : 08.06.2022
First Appeal filed on : 11.06.2022
First Appellate Order on : 11.07.2022
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 25.07.2022
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 05.05.2022 seeking information related to complaint no. 303/22 filed by Ms. Malti Tiwari/Tripathi on the following points:-
1. Certified copy of the FIR as detailed above.
2. Certified copy of the periodical progress report on investigation in respect of above FIR.
3. Please inform me the Name, Designation, Badge Number, Office Address and Phone No of the Investigating Officer(s) entrusted with the investigation of the case with respect to above FIR.
4. Certified copy of the investigation report as prepared by the Investigating officer in respect of above FIR.
5. Please supply me the copy of record and/or statements of accused and/or witnesses recorded during the course of investigation, based on which the report and findings were drawn by the investigating officer.
6. If the accused and/or witnesses were not interrogated or their statements not recorded, please supply me certified copy of documents based on which the findings of investigation were drawn by the Investigating Official.Page 1 of 2
The PIO, Outer District, vide letter dated 08.06.2022 replied as under:-
For point no. 1, 2 & 4 to 6:- The information sought by appellant cannot be provided as per section 8(1) H & 8(1)(J) of the RTI Act-2005. For point 3:- IO ASI R.C Meena no. 121/OD Phone no. 01127922309, PS Raj Park.
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 11.06.2022. The FAA/DCP, Outer District, vide order dated 11.07.2022 upheld the reply of the CPIO.
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 both the parties. ACP Santosh Kumar, Insp. O P Mandal and SI Narender represented Delhi police, Outer District. The Appellant was duly present during the hearing.
During the course of hearing the Appellant contended that the FIR is a public document and therefore the same should have been made available under the RTI Act. The Respondent on the other hand contended that copy of FIR is furnished to the relevant parties and since the Appellant never disclosed his locus standi, copy of the FIR was not given to him. The Respondent further stated that investigation with respect to the FIR in question has now attained finality and the report in this regard alongwith the entire file has been placed before the Court. The Appellant stated that he is related to the Complainant, though admittedly no document had been submitted indicating the same.
Decision:
In the light of the above discussion, it is hereby directed that the Respondent shall send a revised reply containing the current updated status report related to the complaint no. 303/22 to the Appellant, within fifteen days of receipt of this order.
The appeal is disposed off on the above terms.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल साम रया) Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . िचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 2 of 2