Central Information Commission
Mrdharam Pal vs Gnctd on 3 June, 2016
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
(Room No.315, BWing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi 110 066)
Prof. M. Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar)
Information Commissioner
CIC/SA/A/2016/000276
Dharam Pal v. Registrar of Cooperative Societies, GNCTD
Important Dates and time taken:
RTI : 30112015 1st Appeal: 11122015 2nd Appeal: 122016
Rejected Hearing: 03062016 Decided on: 03062016
Appellant: Present.
Public Authority: Tarun Kumar.
FACTS:
2. Appellant filed RTI application requesting information regarding an arbitration case between Satya Cooperative Credit and Thrift Society, Rohini and some members etc. PIO stated that it does not pertain to the audit branch. Claiming nonsatisfaction over the information furnished by the Public Authority, the appellant approached the Commission in second appeal.
Proceedings
3. The PIO stated that information/documents sought by the appellant, are alleged to have been stolen by the appellant.
Page 1
4. Appellant is convicted criminal under Section 419, 420 etc and sentenced with imprisonment and fine based on his confession before the Court. Following is the conclusion of the Court. Mr M C Gupta, ACMM/Rohini/4.3.2008 concluded in case of State v Dharmapal.
Accused number one Atma Ram already stood discharged. ....At this state, an application dated 4.3.2008 for pleading guilty to the offences filed on behalf of Accused Dharma Pal through Counsel Shri R S Deshwal... I have inquired from the accused as to why he is pleading guilty to the offences at this stage to which he stated on the lines of averments made in the application and prayed for leniency. I am satisfied that accused is voluntarily pleading guilty to the offences without any threat, pressure, coercion or inducement. Acting on the candid confession of guilt made by the accused, I hold him guilty for the offences punishable u/s 419, 420, 468, 471 and convict him there under.
5. However the court was lenient and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for the period already undergone by him and pay Rs 500 in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for three months u/s 468 IPC. He was similarly sentenced for crime under section 471.
6. This is sufficient to explain the character of appellant. From the files and the submissions, it appears that the appellant made his own relatives members of society, made them to apply for loans, and guided them to default, the loan applications and the related documents were stolen by himself, for which he was convicted. The representatives of the RCS explained that thereafter he is approaching the public authority under the RTI Act, seeking property returns of the Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies for performing his duty in probing affairs in the society. It was also told to the Commission that being partially impaired, the appellant represented wrongly that he was visually impaired completely. He took the assistance of Commission staff as if he was blind. But when PIO shown the bunch papers given in response to RTI he promptly responded saying he already got those papers and threw back to PIO.
7. When Commission asked the public authority to provide inspection of the files, the appellant laughed and said, "how can you show the files which you do not have?"
Page 2
8. The allegations against him in his capacity as caretaker of society are very serious: that he himself was responsible for making irregular members out of his own relatives, granting loans to them, making them defaulters, stealing the documents, etc.
9. The Commission finds this case as a criminal abuse of the RTI Act. The appellant has not come with clean hands. If his petition is entertained such abuse, it will be a mockery of access law. The appellant is trying to misuse the sympathy for his visually disabled status. The Commission records its strong admonition, rejects his application and advises him not to cause waste of time of public authorities including the Commission on this subject. The Commission finds it appropriate to recommend the RCS to examine the impact of appellant's confession of the guilt of fraud charges and initiate appropriate legal process to take remedial measures according to law, including the recovery of money. The appellant has no right to demand any information on this aspect. The Commission would like to record a finding that sufficient information as available was furnished to the appellant.
10. The Commission finds it appropriate to impose costs on the appellant to pay to the public authority. The Commission strongly recommends the appellant to pay Rs. 10,000 as costs to public authority for harassing them with these kinds of abusive RTI requests.
(M. Sridhar Acharyulu) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (Babu Lal) Deputy Registrar Order copies handed over to the parties present in th hearing, free of cost.
Page 3 Addresses of the parties:
1. The PIO under the RTI Act, , RTI Cell, Govt of Delhi Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Old Court Building Sansad Marg, New Delhi110001
2. Shri Dharam Pal A211Gali No.7, Friends Enclave Nangloi, Delhi110086 Page 4