Central Information Commission
Mr.Jai Bhagwan Sharma vs Cbi on 16 July, 2012
Central Information Commission, New Delhi
File No.CIC/SM/A/2011/002193
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19)
Date of hearing : 16 July 2012
Date of decision : 16 July 2012
Name of the Appellant : Shri Jai Bhagwan Sharma,
Plot No. 24, Mahaveer Nagar,
Near Goreshwar Bheru Mandir Basni,
I Phase, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, Central Bureau of Investigation,
Special Crime Branch, A2 Wing,
8th Floor, CGO Complex, CBD, Belapur,
Navi Mumbai.
The Appellant was not present in spite of notice.
On behalf of the Respondent, Shri Sandeep Tamgadge, CPIO was
present.
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Satyananda Mishra The Appellant, in his application dated 11 April 2011, had wanted to know if there was any compulsion from the Prime Minister or the Home Minister not to interrogate the Chief Minister of Gujarat in connection with the Gujarat riots and the reasons for not charge sheeting Shri. Narendra Modi in a specific encounter case of Sohrabuddin and his wife.
2. The CPIO, in his letter dated 14 June 2011, had transferred the application to the concerned department under section 6(3) of Right to Information Act. The concerned CPIO had informed that two charge sheets had been filed and the case was under investigation under section 173(8) of the Cr. PC. Not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the Appellant filed an Appeal CIC/SM/A/2011/002193 before the first Appellate Authority who dismissed his appeal in his order dated 5 August 2011 by stating that the reply furnished by CPIO and SP,CBI/SCB was correct and also stated that no such compulsion or order was received from any one. It was also intimated to the Applicant that the CBI was exempted from the Right to Information Act as per the Government of India Notification no. F. NO. 1/3/2011IR dated 09.06.2011. Thereafter, the Applicant filed the second appeal before the Central Information Commission.
3. The Appellant did not turn up in the Jodhpur studio the NIC in spite of notice. The Respondent was present in the Mumbai studio. We heard his submissions.
4. We have carefully considered the response of the CPIO. The Appellant had wanted to know if there was any compulsion from the Prime Minister or the Home Minister not to interrogate the Chief Minister of Gujarat in connection with the Gujarat riots. The CPIO had clearly stated that there was no such order or compulsion from either the Prime Minister or the Home Minister in this regard. The Respondent submitted that there was no record to show that any order or direction had been received from any of these authorities or anyone else not to interrogate the Chief Minister. Thus, there is no information to be disclosed.
5. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
6. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
(Satyananda Mishra) Chief 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.
CIC/SM/A/2011/002193 (Vijay Bhalla) Deputy Registrar CIC/SM/A/2011/002193