Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Mary Margeret Anthony Pillai vs Ministry Of External Affairs on 11 March, 2026

                                     के    ीय सूचना आयोग
                           Central Information Commission
                                बाबा गंगनाथ माग,मुिनरका
                            Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                                नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं      ा / Second Appeal No. CIC/MOEAF/A/2024/638934

 Mary Margeret Anthony                                        ... अपीलकता/Appellant
 Pillai

                                      VERSUS
                                       बनाम
 CPIO
 Ministry of External Affairs
 New Delhi                                                  ... ितवादीगण/Respondent

Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

 RTI : 25.11.2023 re-
 registered upon transfer to
                             FA           : 08.06.2024        SA       : 28.08.2024
 Respondent CPIO as dated
 08.01.2024.
 CPIO : 05.02.2024              FAO : 04.07.2024              Hearing : 26.02.2026


Date of Decision: 11.03.2026

                                     CORAM
                Chief Information Commissioner: RAJ KUMAR GOYAL
                                     ORDER

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 25.11.2023, before the CPIO, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi, seeking information as under:

"I am the mother of minor Prijin who was onboard St. Antony fishing boat which has been subjected to gunfire from Italian Marines from my Enrica Lexie ship on 15-02- 2012 and who took his life on 02-07-2019. I am submitting this application under RTI Act 2005 for obtaining the following information to produce in WP(C) No 18798 of 2021 Page 1 of 7 Second Appeal No. CIC/MOEAF/A/2024/638934 before High Court of Kerala (in which Ministry of External Affairs is Respondent No.2) and also for further remedies in Republic of Italy and also before international human rights forums/tribunals

1) Copy of all information including communications related to the compensation of victims in Enrica Lexie (Italian Marines) case pursuant to arbitral award dated 21-

05-2020 in PCA Case No. 2015-28 of Arbitral Tribunal of Permanent Court of Arbitration, The Hague (PCA)

2) Whether Ministry of External Affairs or Government of India through Ministry of External Affairs has issued any communication or statement to the effect that victims in the Enrica Lexie case was given full compensation from the amount deposited by Italy in compliance with arbitral award dt 21-05-2020 in PCA Case No. 2015-28 of Arbitral Tribunal of PCA.

a) If yes, copy of the same along with documents submitted along with it.

b) Details of all amounts received from Republic of Italy by Union of India in Enrica Lexie case.

3) Whether Ministry of External Affairs have any documents concerning amount released by P and I Club and/or indemnified of mv Enrica Lexie ship in the events of 15- 02-2012

4) Whether Ministry of External Affairs has received any compensation claim or communication from legal heirs of minor Prijin pursuant to arbitral award dt 21-05-2020 in PCA Case No. 2015-28 of the Arbitral Tribunal of PCA.

a) If yes, details of action taken on same.

5) Whether Ministry of External Affairs or Government of India through Ministry of External Affairs have informed Republic of Italy regarding presence of minor Prijin on St. Antony fishing boat on 15-02-2012 pursuant to order dt 25-11-2022 in Misc. Appin No 1291/2021 in SLP(C) No 20370 of 2012.

a) If yes, details and copy of said information.

6) Whether Republic of Italy have issued any communication after resuming criminal investigation pursuant to judgment dated 15-06-2021 of Supreme Court of India in SLP(C) No 20370 of 2012 (paragraph 7(e)).

a) If yes, copy of the same.

7) Status of criminal investigation in the events of 15-02-2012 resumed by Republic of Italy pursuant to paragraph 7(e) of the judgment dated 15-06-2021 of Supreme Court of India In SLP (C) No 20370 of 2012.

a) Copy of the Final Report if the investigation is closed.

8) Details of the co-operation done by Union of India and Government of Kerala in criminal investigation in the events of 15-02-2012 resumed by Republic of Italy pursuant to paragraph 7(e) of judgment dated 15-06-2021 of Supreme Court of India in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No 20370 of 2012"

2. The CPIO & ODS (EW) (Italy, San Marino, Portugal) stated the date of receipt of the RTI Application on the online portal as 08.01.2024 and replied to the Appellant on 05.02.2024 in respect of point no.1, as under:

"In respect of query 1, it is informed that the requisite information is available in public domain at website: https://pca-cpa.org/en/cases/117/.."

3. Dissatisfied with the CPIO's reply, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 08.06.2024, before the FAA & Director (EW), Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi, stating inter alia as under:

"1) Information sought to item no 1 was not provided and vague reply that In respect of query 1, it is informed that the requisite information is available in public domain at website: https://pca-cpa.org/en/cases/117/ is provided while it provides only details of arbitration proceedings and award when the information sought is the copy of all Page 3 of 7 Second Appeal No. CIC/MOEAF/A/2024/638934 communication with Indian authority regarding compensation to victims after arbitral award.

2) There is intentional denial of information by providing a vague and misleading reply and the same is done with malafides.

3) CPIO is protecting vested interest of Italian marines and Indian Mission which has protected the interest of Italian government over fundamental rights of victim who was fired upon by Italian marines while in Indian coastal waters.

4) The appellant who is the mother of deceased minor victim Prijin who was onboard Indian boat which has been fired by Italian marines was illegally excluded from getting compensation due to the corruption and vested interests in protecting Italian marines.

5) CPIO through denied information sought to keep the victim at dark and to prevent them from getting remedies for violation of Article 21 of Indian Constitution from Indian Constitutional Courts.

6) Information sought was denied with malafides so as to prevent disclosure of communications through which compensation was illegally limited to only 3 victims by excluding other 9 victim fishermen including the appellant in her capacity as legal hier of deceased minor victim Prijin and to prevent the appellant from using it before pending proceedings before Italian and Indian authroities.

7) Delay in filing first appeal may be condoned as the appellant was not aware of the proceedings and no details was communicate,..."

4. The FAA vide order dated 04.07.2024, upheld the reply of the CPIO.

5. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal on 28.08.2024, seeking relief in respect of point no.1 of the RTI Application and explaining the RTI trajectory as under:

"RTI Application seeking information under 8 items with registration number MOEAF/R/E/23/01622 dated 25-11-2023 was submitted to CPIO, Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India and it was transferred to CPIO, Embassy of India, Rome, Italy with registration number EOIRO/R/T/23/00004 dated 11-12-2023.

EOIRO/R/T/23/00004 was disposed through letter numbered Rome/RTI/415/01/2021 dated 08-01-2024 and to item no. 1 it was given reply that "No records available with this Mission. Ministry may like to respond." The RTI Application for item no. 1 was transferred to CPIO of OSD (EW)(Italy, San Marino and Portugal) under Ministry of External Affairs and was provided Registration Number MOEAF/R/T/24/00016 dated 08-01-2024 and was disposed on 05-02-2024 as per online status by stating that "In respect of query 1, it is informed that the requisite information is available in public website: https://pca-cpa.org/en/cases/117/."

Hearing Proceedings & Decision

6. The Appellant was absent during the hearing and the notice of hearing dated 05.02.2026 was returned undelivered with the remarks- 'deceased'. On behalf of the Respondent, Venkateshwar Thapliyal, OSD (EW) & CPIO along with Subhash Chandra Agarwal, RTI Consultant attended the hearing in person.

7. The Respondent reiterated the reply provided to the Appellant. Further, the written submissions dated 28.01.2026 filed by the CPIO were taken on record, inter alia stating as under:

"2. The case has already been decided vide order dated 21.08.2025 in file-number CIC/EOIRI/A/2024/635357 where Hon'ble Commission held that the response sent by the Respondent is legally appropriate and well within the precincts of the RTI Act, no further intervention is warranted in this case under the RTI Act...."

8. It was observed by the Commission that the instant second appeal lies in respect of the reply dated 05.02.2024 provided by the CPIO & ODS (EW) (Italy, San Marino, Portugal), while the averred earlier matter, albeit referencing the same RTI Application Page 5 of 7 Second Appeal No. CIC/MOEAF/A/2024/638934 was heard and decided in respect of the reply dated 08.01.2024 of the CPIO/HOC, Embassy of Rome, stating that- "No records available with this Mission. Ministry may like to respond."

9. In particular reference to the reply of 05.02.2024, the CPIO was asked to rebut the allegation of the Appellant as contained in the grounds for First & Second Appeal stating that the link provided by the CPIO- 'provides only details of arbitration proceedings and award when the information sought is the copy of all communication with Indian authority regarding compensation to victims after arbitral award.' In pursuance of this, the relevant website link was opened before the Bench and it was noticed that the link was not the web domain of the Respondent public authority but was an external link to the web domain of the Permanent Court of Arbitration.

10. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, observes at the outset that the information sought at point not 1 of the RTI Application seeks "copy of all information including communications related to the compensation", which is an indeterminate and open ended query and as such, does not conform to Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. However, the CPIO has failed to reply in terms of the provisions of the RTI Act, instead furnished the details of a misleading/irrelevant web link to the Appellant. The CPIO is hereby advised to ensure exercise of due diligence while replying to the RTI Applications in future.

11. The Appeal is dismissed accordingly.

A copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-

(Raj Kumar Goyal) (राज कुमार गोयल) Chief Information Commissioner (मु सूचना आयु ) िदनां क/Date: 11.03.2026 Page 6 of 7 Second Appeal No. CIC/MOEAF/A/2024/638934 Authenticated true copy Bijendra Kumar (िबज कुमार) Dy. Registrar (उप पं जीयक) 011-26186535 Page 7 of 7 Second Appeal No. CIC/MOEAF/A/2024/638934 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)