Central Information Commission
Amarpal Singh vs Forensic Science Laboratory on 11 July, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/103142
CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/102955
AMARPAL SINGH .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
1. Dr. Puneet Puri,
PIO-cum-Assistant Director
FORENSIC SCIENCE LABORATORY
SECTOR-14, ROHINI, DELHI-110085
2. Ms. Deepa Verma,
Director,
FORENSIC SCIENCE LABORATORY
SECTOR-14, ROHINI,
DELHI-110085 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 22.02.2024
Date of Decision : 27.02.2024
Date of First SCN Hearing : 04.06.2024
Date of First SCN Decision : 11.06.2024
Date of Second SCN Hearing : 20.06.2025
Date of Second SCN Decision : 10.07.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
The abovementioned Appeals have been clubbed together for decision as
these are based on identical RTI Applications of the same Appellant.
Page 1 of 21
Relevant facts emerging from appeals:
RTI applications filed on : 22.08.2022
CPIO replied on : 22.09.2022
First appeals filed on : 06.10.2022
First Appellate Authority's order : 03.11.2022
2nd Appeals/Complaint dated : 12.01.2023
CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/103142
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 22.08.2022 seeking the following information:
"1. kindly provide me certified copies of notings and correspondence copies of the files pertaining to purchase of Video Measurement Set (VM 700T) & TG-700 from Tektronix (India) Pvt Ltd.
2. kindly provide me certified copies of logs books of the Instruments VM 700T and TG 700. I will pay the extra fee required for the photocopies of the certified copies."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 22.09.2022 stating as under:
"It is to inform you that, we haven't received the proper reply from concerned division, therefore, we are unable to provide the information at present."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 06.10.2022. The FAA vide its order dated 03.11.2022 directed the PIO to reconsider the RTI application of the applicant as per RTI Act, 2005 and accordingly provide the information to the applicant.
In compliance with the FAA's Order, the CPIO vide letter dated 24.11.2022 replied as under:
"It is to inform you that, the desired correspondence/file is not traceable in the concerned division, therefore, we are unable to provide the information at present, you will be replied as soon as the correspondence/file will be available."Page 2 of 21
CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/102955 Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 22.08.2022 seeking the following information:
"1. please provide me certified copies of notings & correspondence of the file pertaining to purchase of UFED physical pro-ruggedized Kit (File no F.3(21)/FSL/Pur/2009).
2. please provide me certified copies of notings and correspondence of the file pertaining to the purchase of High-speed Forensic workstation F.3(34)/FSL/Pur/2009.
3. please provide me certified copies of notings and correspondence of the file related to the purchase of 06 UFED with cloud analyzers in the year 2021 for Computer Forensic division of FSL Delhi.
4. please provide me certified copies of logbooks related to above instruments."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 22.09.2022 stating as under:
"It is to inform you that, we haven't received the proper reply from concerned division, therefore, we are unable to provide the information at present."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 06.10.2022. The FAA vide its order dated 03.11.2022 directed the PIO to reconsider the RTI application of the applicant as per RTI Act, 2005 and provide the information to the applicant.
In compliance with the FAA's Order, the CPIO vide letter dated 24.11.2022 replied as under:
"It is to inform you that, the desired correspondence/file is not traceable in the concerned division, therefore, we are unable to provide the information at present, you will be replied as soon as the correspondence/file will be available."
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant set of Second Appeals.
Page 3 of 21Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing on 22.02.2024:
The following were present: -
Appellant: Present in person.
Respondent: Dr. S. K. Paul, S.S.O. and PIO present in person.
Appellant pleaded that the information has been deliberately not furnished by the PIO despite been the custodian of records.
Respondent submitted that the information as sought by the Appellant has not been received by them from the concerned division, despite repeated reminders. Further, he submitted that even if he gathers the relevant information, it may be noted that the detail of averred purchases attracts the applicability of Section 8 (1)(d) of the RTI Act. Nonetheless, he agreed to share the requisite information to the Appellant after accessing the same from their concerned division.
Decision Dated 27.02.2024:
At the outset, the Commission observes from a perusal of records that the instant RTI Application has been casually handled by the Respondent which is not in the spirit of RTI Act. The plea of the Respondent with respect to facilitating the requested information to the Appellant upon receipt of the same from their concerned wing and on the other hand, his claim for denial for information during the hearing under Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act appears to be contradictory in nature and cryptic because no explanation has been offered for invoking exemption clause. Moreover, the Respondent even after receipt of hearing notice of the Commission did not even bother to gather the information as sought for by their Purchase Division now. Here, it is also noteworthy that the then CPIO at the first instance should have applied his mind and should have invoked Section 5(4) of the RTI Act for seeking the assistance of the concerned record holder in order to render due assistance to the RTI Applicant instead of giving vague assurance to furnish information at a later stage. The conduct of the Respondent causes unwarranted obstruction to the Appellant's right to information which is in violation to the provisions of the RTI Act.
The Commission takes a serious view of this lapse and hence, the present PIO, Mr. S. K. Paul, S.S.O. along with deemed PIO (custodian of the information) are show caused as to why maximum penalty under Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act should not be imposed on them. The written explanations of both the PIOs Page 4 of 21 must reach the Commission by uploading it on http://dsscic.nic.in/online- linkpaper-compliance/add within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
Meanwhile, the Respondent is directed to provide a point-wise reply along with relevant information against each RTI Application to the Appellant by accessing the same from the actual custodian by invoking Section 5(4) of the RTI Act, within three weeks of receipt of this order. First Appellate Authority to ensure compliance of this direction.
Relevant Facts emerged during First Show-Cause proceedings held on 04.06.2024:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present in person.
Respondent: Dr. S. K. Paul, S.S.O. and PIO present in person.
The Appellant submitted that till date complete and correct information has not been provided to him by the Respondent on his above-mentioned RTI applications despite order from the Commission on 27.02.2024. The Appellant further submitted that the reply given by the Respondent vide letter dated 12.04.2024 in compliance to Commission's order dated 27.02.2024, is incomplete and misleading. He stated that certified copy of information on point No. 2 has not been provided to him by the Respondent. Further, legible copies of information/logbook was not provided to him. He stated that photocopy of the documents was not done properly by the Respondent officials.
He stated that penalty should be imposed on the erring officials for non- compliance of Commission's directions.
The written explanation dated 09.04.2024 of Shri S K Paul, PIO, FSL is taken on record and the same is reproduced hereinbelow:
"2 In this regard, it is submitted that the undersigned being PIO, FSL., Delhi, had sought the requisite information from the concerned division vide internal letters dated 26.08.2022 (Annexure -1), dt. 12.09.2022 (Annexure-2) and dt.21.09.2022 (Annexure-3) as per section 5(4) of the RTI Act, 2005 and tendered the requisite reply to the applicant on the basis of the records available with him accordingly within the stipulated time under RII Act, 2005. Subsequently, in compliance of FAA order, requisite information were again Page 5 of 21 sought from the concerned division vide internal letters dated 10.11.2022 (Annexure-4) and the requisite reply was tendered to the applicant within the stipulated time period as per RTI Act, 2005.
3 In compliance of Hon'ble CIC order, requisite information were again sought from the concerned division vide internal letters dated 08.03.2024 (Annexure5), dt.14.03.2024 (Annexure-6), dt.05.04.2021 (Annexure-7), dt 25.04.2024 (Annexure-8), dt 30.05.2021 (Annexure-9) and dt.03.06.2024 (Annexure-10) In response to the above mentioned internal letters, APIO (Physics, Audio, Video) has furnished the copy of relevant pages of the logbook of the concerned instruments w.r.t query net2 of RTI application vide no. ESLAB/R/2022/60049 and Cyber Forensic Division stated that the forensic workstations installed in the Division are generally equipped with inbuilt software and other forensic tools for retrieval of digital data from the submitted digital exhibits, The forensic workstations are assigned to each reporting officer individually for their day to day case examination work with respect to the query No. 04 of the R11 application vide no. FSLAB/R/2022/60050 But, the copies of noting and correspondence of the requisite files with respect to queries No I of RII application vide no. FSLAB/R/2022/60049 and queries no. 1 to 3 of the RTI application vide no. FSLAB/R/2022/60050 has not been received to the undersigned till date.
4. In view of the above, it is submitted that there is no intentional delay/violation of the RTI Act, 2005. Further, it is humble request that the undersigned being PIO, FSL, Delhi always abide with the rules and regulations issued by the Govt. from time to time and honor the instructions/directions issued by concerned higher authorities honorable CIC etc. to tender the requisite reply to the applicant within the stipulated time under the spirit of RTI Act. Therefore, it is requested to kindly accept the submission of undersigned."
The written explanations dated 03.06.2024 of Shri S K Paul, PIO, FSL is taken on record and the same is reproduced hereinbelow:
"In this regard, it is submitted that the undersigned being PIO, FSL., Delhi, had sought the requisite information from the concerned division vide internal letters dated 26.08.2022 (Annexure -1), dt. 12.09.2022 (Annexure-2) and dt.21.09.2022 (Annexure-3) as per section 5(4) of the RTI Act, 2005 and tendered the requisite reply to the applicant on the basis of the records available with him accordingly within the stipulated time under RII Act, 2005. Subsequently, in compliance of FAA order, requisite information were again sought from the concerned division vide internal letters dated 10.11.2022 Page 6 of 21 (Annexure-4) and the requisite reply was tendered to the applicant within the stipulated time period as per RTI Act, 2005.
In compliance of Hon'ble CIC order, requisite information were again sought from the concerned division vide internal letters dated 08.03.2024 (Annexure5), dt.14.03.2024 (Annexure-6), dt.05.04.2021 (Annexure-7), dt 25.04.2024 (Annexure-8), dt 30.05.2021 (Annexure-9) and dt.03.06.2024 (Annexure-10) In response to the above mentioned internal letters, APIO (Physics, Audio-Video) has furnished the copy of relevant pages of the logbook of the concerned instruments w.r.t query no.2 of RII application vide no. ESLAB/R/2022/60049 and Cyber Forensic Division stated that the forensic workstations installed in the Division are generally equipped with inbuilt software and other forensic tools for retrieval of digital data from the submitted digital exhibits, The forensic workstations are assigned to each reporting officer individually for their day to day case examination work with respect to the query No. 04 of the RTI application vide no. FSLAB/R/2022/60050 But, the copies of noting and correspondence of the requisite files with respect to queries No I of RII application vide no. FSLAB/R/2022/60049 and queries no. 1 to 3 of the RTI application vide no. FSLAB/R/2022/60050 has not been received to the undersigned till date.
5 The Public Information Officer (PIO) is responsible for dealing with requests from persons seeking information and rendering reasonable assistance to the persons seeking such information. Being a PIO, the RTI section has compiled all the information as provided by the APIO/Custodian of the information and provides all available information to the applicant in a time bound manner under RTI Act, 2005.
In view of the above, it is submitted that there is no intentional delay/violation of the RTI Act, 2005. Further, it is humble request that the undersigned being PIO, FSI.. Delhi always abide with the rules and regulations issued by the Govt. from time to time and honor the instructions/directions issued by concerned higher authorities honorable CIC etc. to tender the requisite reply to the applicant within the stipulated time under the spirit of RTI Act. Therefore, it is requested to kindly accept the submission of undersigned."
Reply dated 12.04.2024 of the Respondent in compliance of Commission's directions is reproduced hereinbelow:
"CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/103142 Page 7 of 21
1. Relevant copies will be provided, after obtaining the file from the concerned division/branch. It is requested you to give us 15 days more to give proper reply.
2. It is to inform that copy of the requisite documents of received from Physics; A/V 700T Division has been enclosed herewith. (Total page-23) CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/102955
1. Relevant copies will be provided, after obtaining the file from the concerned division/branch. It is requested you to give us 15 days more to give proper reply.
2., 3., 4. CFD division furnished that the forensic workstations installed in the division are generally equipped with inbuilt software and other forensic tools for retrieval of digital data from the submitted digital exhibits. The forensic workstations are assigned to each reporting officer individually for their day to day case examination work."
Upon being queried by the Commission regarding non-furnishing of complete information to the Appellant, the Respondent submitted that the information sought with Purchase Branch-I has already been provided to the Appellant and no other information is available in their records. Further, he has sought comments/information from Purchase Branch-II, Physics Division (Audio-Video) and DH (CFD) vide letters dated 26.08.2022, 12.09.2022, 21.09.2022, 10.11.2022, 08.03.2024, 14.03.2024, 05.04.2024, 25.04.2024, 30.05.2024, 03.06.2024 but satisfactory and complete information was not received from them.
Upon being queried, the Respondent submitted that Shri Yogesh Pandey, PO-II, Dr. C P Singh, AD (Physics), Shri Kailash Kumar, Jr. F/ACE(CFD) are the concerned officials and Shri K C Varshney is the First Appellate Authority.
Decision Dated 11.06.2024:
"Perusal of the documents submitted by the Respondent reveals that till date complete and correct information has not been provided to the Appellant on his above-mentioned RTI applications. Even after specific directions of the Commission, requisite documents were not provided to him. The Commission further directs that the deemed PIO (custodian of the information) are show caused as to why maximum penalty under Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act should Page 8 of 21 not be imposed on them. But there is nothing on record to show that any explanation was offered by the deemed PIO (custodian of record).
The Commission was further surprised to note that even after numerous communication/reminders sent by present CPIO of Purchase Branch-I, satisfactory and complete response was not received by concerned divisions of the Public Authority.
The Commission, in its order dated 27.02.2024, had categorically directed that "First Appellate Authority to ensure compliance of this direction." But the FAA had also adopted casual approach in dealing with the directions of the Commission. He has not bothered to check/verify as to whether the directions of the Commission was duly complied with. It establishes that the FAA is nonserious and has adopted lackadaisical approach towards the provisions of the RTI Act as well as towards the Commission. In view of the above, mala fide is established on the part of FAA Shri K C Varshney and the officials namely Shri Yogesh Pandey, PO-II, Dr. C P Singh, AD (Physics), Shri Kailash Kumar, Jr. F/ACE(CFD), who should be treated as 'deemed CPIO' in the present case. Thus, the Commission finds it a fit case for imposition of penalty under provisions of section 20 (1) of RTI Act.
The Commission notes that the negligence of duty as FAA and deemed CPIO is deliberate and mala fide is established on part of Shri K C Varshney, hence, he is found liable as per section 20 (1) of RTI Act. In view of this, a penalty of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) is hereby imposed on him. This penalty amount shall be deducted from salary of Shri K C Varshney, by the Public Authority and paid by way of demand draft drawn in favor of "PAO, CAT", New Delhi, forward the demand drafts addressed to the Deputy Registrar (CR-II), email: [email protected] Room No. 106, First Floor, Central Information Commission, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi 110067. The aforesaid penalty amount should reach the Commission by 30.07.2024.
The Director, Ms. Deepa Verma and Present CPIO, Purchase Branch-I are directed to serve a copy of this order to Shri K C Varshney for its compliance.
In view of the above, inaction on the part of the deemed CPIOs namely Shri Yogesh Pandey, PO-II, Dr. C P Singh, AD (Physics), Shri Kailash Kumar, Jr. Page 9 of 21 F/ACE(CFD) are prima facie established and therefore, the Commission deems it expedient to direct the Registry of this Bench to issue Show Cause Notice as to why maximum penalty should not be imposed under Section 20(1) and 20(2) of the RTI Act, on Shri Yogesh Pandey, PO-II, Dr. C P Singh, AD (Physics), Shri Kailash Kumar, Jr. F/ACE(CFD) for neither providing complete and correct reply qua the instant RTI Applications to the Appellant nor participating in the instant hearing. The Registry of this Bench is directed to issue show cause hearing notice to the Appellant and as well as the Respondent and post the instant matter within a period of three weeks.
The Director, Ms. Deepa Verma should ensure that complete and correct point- wise information should be provided to the Appellant on his abovementioned RTI applications and should also ensure that under all circumstances, written submissions of the erring CPIOs should reach the Commission within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
The instant matter stands adjourned and SCN shall be heard on the next date.
Relevant Facts emerged during Second Show-Cause proceedings held on 20.06.2025:
I. The following were present:- Appellant: Present in person.
Respondent: Dr. Puneet Puri, PIO-cum-Assistant Director, Shri Yogesh Chandra Pandey, Senior Scientific Officer (Chemistry Division) & Purchase Officer-II, Dr. CP Singh, Assistant Director (Physics) and Shri Kailash Kumar, Junior Forensic Assistant Chemical Examiner (CFD), attended the hearing in person.
II. The Appellant stated that till date complete information has not been provided to him by the Respondents on his above-mentioned RTI Applications despite directions from the Commission on 11.06.2024. He added that the Commission vide order dated 11.06.2024, directed Ms. Deepa Verma, Director, to ensure supply of complete information but she did not adhere to the directions of the Commission.
III. Dr. CP Singh, Assistant Director (Physics), submitted that his office is not the custodian of the information pertaining to noting and correspondence copies of the files with regards to purchase of Video Measurement Set, Page 10 of 21 UFED physical pro-ruggedized kit, High Speed Forensic Workstation and 06 UFED with cloud analyzers. However, available information pertaining to log books was provided to the Appellant and a written explanation in this regard has been given to the Appellant vide letter dated 08.07.2024.
IV. Shri Yogesh Chandra Pandey, Senior Scientific Officer (Chemistry Division) & Purchase Officer-II, submitted that he is posted as Senior Scientific Officer (Chemistry) in FSL Delhi. The additional charge of Purchase Officer- II was handed over to him on 13.07.2022 for the procurement of instruments of Cyber Forensic Division, Documents, Fingerprint Unit, CSMD, Photo, Motor Vehicles, Audio/Video and Speaker Authentication Units. He further added that the information sought in the instant RTI Application pertains to the year preceding 2022 and at the time of holding the charge of Purchase Officer-Il, no previous record was handed over to him by the then Purchase Officer and only ongoing/pending files & fresh proposals were marked to him by the higher authorities. Therefore, the requisite information/record file has never been in his custody and a written explanation in this regard has been given to the Appellant vide letter dated 11.07.2024.
V. Shri Kailash Kumar, Junior Forensic Assistant Chemical Examiner (CFD), submitted that his office is not the custodian of the information pertaining to noting and correspondence copies of the files with regards to purchase of Video Measurement Set, UFED physical pro-ruggedized kit, High Speed Forensic Workstation and 06 UFED with cloud analyzers and the same may be available with purchase branch. He added that information pertaining to logbooks with respect to forensic tools installed in Cyber Forensic Division has not been prepared and hence, the copies of the same could not be provided to the Appellant. It is pertinent to mention that the forensic workstations installed in the division are generally equipped with inbuilt software and other forensic tools for retrieval of digital data from the submitted digital exhibits. The forensic workstations are assigned to each Reporting officer individually for their day-to-day case examination work and a written explanation in this regard has been given to the Appellant vide letter dated 05.07.2024.
VI. Dr. Puneet Puri, PIO/FSL and Assistant Director, submitted that he has taken charge as Public Information Officer (PIO), FSL on 03.06.2025. He Page 11 of 21 added that at the time of assuming charge as PIO, no records or files pertaining to the information sought in the instant RTI Application have been handed over to him by the then PIO, Sh. S.K. Paul. Despite several verbal reminders, the said officer failed to hand-over any official records. It is pertinent to mention that the file pertaining to the instant case was taken by the formal PIO and was not handed over to him. This matter was brought to the cognizance of the Principal Director, FSL vide letter dated 17.06.2025 and a Show Cause Notice has been issued to the then PIO Sh. S.K. Paul for not complying with the mandatory procedure of handing over charge along with records vide letter dated 18.06.2025, stating as under:
"Whereas, it has come to the notice of the Principal Director, HOD, FSL that you were performing your duties earlier as PIO in FSL, but as per the transfer orders dated 02.06.2025 you have been transferred to VEERA Centre and Dr. Puneet Puri has been assigned to perform duties as PIO, FSL.
Whereas, it has come to the notice that you have not handed over the charges of PIO to the said officer le.e Dr. Puneet Puri, Assistant Director/PIO FSL till date. Whereas, there is a matter related to appellant Sh. Amarpal Singh, Is listed for hearing on 20.06.2025 before CIC and as per the information received from the Dealing Assistant, you have taken the concerned file at the time of last hearing in CIC and the same is in your possession.
You are hereby issued a show cause notice for not handing over the charges of PIO to Dr. Puneet Puri, who has now been appointed as PIO FSL, despite being relieved from your position. And further directed to hand over the charge today itself i.e. 18/06/2025 or attend the CIC matter related to appellant Sh. Amarpal Singh, personally on 20.06.2025 along with all relevant documents. Whereas, in case CIC imposes any kind of cost/fine on the PIO FSL, you shall bear the same because of your non-compliance of the transfer order dated 02.06.2025.
Therefore, you are directed to show cause to the undersigned within 03 working days of receipt of this letter as to why the disciplinary action should not be taken against you for not handing over the charges to the PIO, FSL. Non submission of any response will be deemed that you have nothing to submit in this concern and accordingly appropriate action will be taken against you as per rules.
This issues with prior approval of Pr. Director, FSL."Page 12 of 21
VII. A written explanation to the SCN has been received from Dr. CP Singh, Assistant Director (Physics), vide letter dated 08.07.2024, stating as under:
"Kindly refer to the show cause notice dated 11/06/2024 received by undersigned on dated 01/07/2024. It is mentioned that the undersigned is neither CPIO nor APIO of the division and he is not authorized person to provide information to applicant under RTI Act.
As such authorize APIO of the division is already assigned by competent authority. Further, it is to mention that vide letter dated 08/03/2024, the commission order was forwarded to give the requisite information for the first time in the division in Physics (A/V). The copy of the log book available in the laboratory was provided by APIO letter Dated 12/03/24 (Copy of the letter is enclosed for your kind perusal. In the said letter it was categorically mentioned that:-
1. The file pertaining to purchase of VM700T & TG 700 from Tektronix India Pvt.
Ltd is not in the custody of Physics Division. Therefore, the information sought is not pertains to Physics Division & same was also not sought from Physics Division in past.
II. Additional information sought in connection with request for providing copy of log book of VM700T & TG700 is provided herewith running upto 23 pages. It is also mentioned that the said log book remain in the laboratory near the concerned equipment & the said log book is not in the custody of undersigned at any point of time. On scrutiny of the copy of the log book provided to the applicant it was found Xerox copy of the pages which are found filled by the operator and same were found correctly provided to the applicant through CPIO, FSL by the APIO on Dated 12/03/24.
In view of above explanation, the undersigned may not be treated as deemed CPIO in the present case considering the above explanation to the show cause issued by the commission."
VIII. A written submission has been received from Dr. SK Paul, PIO/FSL, vide letter dated 19.07.2024, stating as under:
"Compliance of Hon'ble CIC order dated 11.06.2024 in RTI Appeal No. CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/103142 & CIC/POSCL/A/2023/102955 received in RTI branch on dt,27.06.2024 having dairy No. 189/PIO/FSL on dated 27.06.2024. Sir.
Please refer to the Flon'ble CIC aforementioned orders vide Appeal No. CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/103142 & CIC/POSCL/A/2023/102955 on dated 27.06.2024 which undersigned being present PIO and Director FSL have been directed to serve the copy of this order to Shri K.C. Varshney for its compliance.Page 13 of 21
2 In this regard, it is submitted that the undersigned being PIO, FSL, Delhi, have issued internal correspondence along with the copy of the Hon'ble CIC order to Shri K.C. Varshney, Deputy Director & FAA, Dr C.P.Singh, DH (A&V), Sh Yogesh Chandra Pandey, Purchase Officer-II and Sh Kailash. JFACE, CFD on 28.06.2024 (copy enclosed) and tendered the requisite reply to the applicant on the basis of the records available with him accordingly within the stipulated time as directed by Hon'ble CIC.
3. In compliance of Hon'ble Information Commission's instant order requisite information Dr C.P.Singh DH (Physics, Audio-Video) (Annexure-II), Sh Yogesh Chandra Pandey, Purchase Officer-Il (Annexure-III) and Sh Kailash, JFACE, CFD (Annexure-IV) have furnished the reply are hereby enclosed
4. Further, it is humble request that the undersigned being PIO, FSL, Delhi always abide with the rules and regulations issued by the Govt. from time to time and honor the instructions/directions issued by concerned higher authorities ie. honorable CIC ete. to tender the requisite reply to the applicant within the stipulated time under the spirit of RTI Act. Therefore, it is requested to kindly accept the submission of undersigned."
IX. A written explanation to the SCN has been received from Shri Yogesh Chandra Pandey, Senior Scientific Officer (Chemistry Division) & Purchase Officer-II, vide letter dated 11.07.2024, stating as under:
"Please refer to Order No. CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/103142 and CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/102955 of Hon'ble CIC's in matter of Sh. Amarpal singh V/S PIO FSL GNCTD regarding the Query no. 1 in CIC order no. CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/103142 and Query no. 1, 2 and 3 in CIC order no. CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/102955.
In this regard it is humbly submitted that the undersigned is posted as Senior Scientific Officer (Chemistry) in FSL Delhi. The additional charge of Purchase Officer II was handed over to the undersigned vide Office Order F1(3)/Pr./DFSL/Office Order/2022 dated 13.07.2022 for the procurement of instruments of Cyber Forensic Division, Documents, Finger Print Unit, CSMD, Photo, Motor Vehicles, Audio/Video and speaker Authentication Units.
Further it is requested that, the current matter is of before 2022 and I have joined the services in FSL Delhi as SSO on dated 25-04-2017. It is also pertinent to mention here that at the time of holding the charge of Purchase Officer -Il no previous record was handed over to me by the then Purchase Officer, only ongoing/pending files & fresh proposals were marked to me by the higher authorities therefore the requisite information/record file has never been in the Page 14 of 21 custody of the undersigned. In reply of the previous RTI same had been informed to the PIO, FSL.
Furthermore it is submitted that through above stated orders of Hon'ble CIC, undersigned has again been directed to provide the information to the appellant, in this regard your-goodself is requested not to consider the undersigned as the custodian of the said files/information. Any inconvenience to Hon'ble CIC in this regard is highly regretted."
X. A written explanation to the SCN has been received from Shri Kailash Kumar, Junior Forensic Assistant Chemical Examiner (CFD), vide letter dated 05.07.2024, stating as under:
"Sub:
In compliance of Hon'ble CIC's letter vide CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/103142 & CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/102955 date of hearing 04.06.2024 received in the division vide Diary no 211 dated 28.06.2024.
In this regard it is to submit that the undersigned has not ever been nominated as CPIΟ for division. However, the requisite RTI application/ letters were marked to the undersigned by Division Head (CFD) to provide the requisite information for onward submission to PIO/FSL. In this case I have also prepared all the replies accordingly and duly forwarded through division head for onward submission to the PIO/FSL.
With reference to FSL letter no. 211 dated 28/06/2024 in connection with CIC's letter vide CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/103142 & CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/102955 date of hearing 04.06.2024 and the information are as follows: Reply of Query 01 to 03: The notings & correspondence of the mentioned purchase files as mentioned in your letter at para no. 03, 04 running in pages 05 to 07 are not available in the division and same may be present with the purchase branch of this laboratory. Please also refer my earlier reply in this regard vide this office letter no. 55, 59, 139 and 145 dated 08.03.2024, 14.03.2024, 30.05.2024 and 03.06.2024 respectively (Copy Enclosed).
Reply of Query 04: Log book with r/o forensic tools installed in Cyber Forensic Division has not been prepared and thus the copies of the same could not be provided to the appellant. However, It is further to mention that the forensic workstations installed in the division are generally equipped with inbuilt software and other forensic tools for retrieval of digital data from the submitted digital exhibits. The forensic workstations are assigned to each Reporting officer individually for their day to day case examination work. In view of the above, it is humbly submitted that the undersigned had provided all the requisite information which are available in the division and there is no Page 15 of 21 mala fide intention to hide any facts/information which are required to be supplied under RTI Act.
Inconvenience caused to Hon'ble CIC in highly regretted please"
XI. A written submission has been received from Dr. Puneet Puri, PIO/FSL and Assistant Director, vide letter dated 20.06.2025, stating as under:
"1. In compliance with the directions issued during the hearing held on 20.06.2025 before the Hon'ble Central Information Commission (CIC) in the matters of CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/103142 and CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/102955, filed by the appellant Sh. Amarpal Singh, the following is submitted:
2. I, Puneet Puri, resumed the duty of Public Information Officer (PIO), FSL on 03.06.2025 in compliance with Order No.f.2(2)/FSL/Estt/Misc./Office order/2014/1169-1173 on dated 02/06/2025 (Annexure-1).
3. It is respectfully submitted that no records or files pertaining to the PIO charge were handed over to me by the then PIO, Sh. S.K. Paul, at the time of assuming charge. Despite several verbal reminders, the said officer failed to provide any official records.
4. I came to know that a matter related to appellant Sh. Amarpal Singh is pending for hearing on 20.06.25 in CIC as per the dealing assistant the file pertains to the matter was taken by the formal PIO at the time of last hearing in CIC and not handed over to him which I inform through my note dated 14.06.25 to director FSL (Annexure-2).
5. The matter was brought to the cognizance of the Principal Director, FSL through my note on 17.06.25 (Annexure-3) and a Show Cause Notice has been issued to the then PIO for not complying with the mandatory procedure of handing over charge along with records (Annexure-4).
6. A note was received to me vide letter no. 177/DFSL on dated 16.06.2025 (Annexure-5) from the PS branch of Director FSL to seek the reply from the concerned divisions. Accordingly, requisite information were sought form the concerned divisions vide internal letters dated 16.06.2025 (Annexure-6).
7. In response to the above mentioned internal letters on dated 16.06.2025, DH (CFD), DH (Audio-Video) and Purchase Officer-II has furnished the information has been provided (Annexure. 7-9). The same information sent to Director (1) FSL."
XII. A written submission has been received from Shri Yogesh Chandra Pandey, Senior Scientific Officer (Chemistry Division) & Purchase Officer-II, vide letter dated 18.06.2025, stating as under:
Page 16 of 21"Subject: Reply to Show Cause Notice under Section 20(1) and 20(2) of the RTI Act, 2005 In the matter of: CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/103142 and CIC/FOSCL/A/2023/102955 Appellant: Sh. Amarpal Singh Respected Sir, In compliance with the Show Cause Notice issued by the Hon'ble Commission in the above-referred matters, I, Yogesh Chandra Pandey, Senior Scientific Officer (Chemistry) and currently holding the additional charge of Purchase Officer-II, Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL), Delhi, most respectfully submit the following for your kind consideration:
1. Regarding Role and Tenure:
I was appointed as Senior Scientific Officer (Chemistry) in FSL Delhi on 25.04.2017. Later, I was assigned the additional responsibility of Purchase Officer-II vide Office Order No. F1(3)/Pr./DFSL/Office Order/2022 dated 13.07.2022 (Copy Enclosed) to oversee procurement matters of various specialized units, including Cyber Forensics, Documents, Fingerprints, CSMD, Audio/Video, Photo. On dated 31-10-2023 I have also been nominated as APIO of purchase branch (Copy of Order enclosed)
2. Context of RTI Timeline & Custodianship of Records:
The RTI applications and issues raised in the above CIC orders pertain to a time prior to my appointment as Purchase Officer-II. It is respectfully submitted that prior to the bifurcation of the Purchase Branch, all procurement work was managed under a single Purchase Branch. Subsequently, Purchase Branch-II was created to streamline the workload, and I was given charge of this newly formed unit on dated 13-07-2022.
At the time of assuming this charge, no earlier files or historical procurement records were handed over to me by the then Purchase Officer. Only ongoing or new files were marked to me.
3. Participation in Matter:
I was enquired about the possession of records in question by the then PIO/Purchase officer-I vide letter no 60 Dt 14-03-2024, letter no. 210 Dt. 28-06- 2024 (Copy Enclosed). In response the undersigned on dated 26-03-2024 followed by letter no. 29/PO-II Dt. 11-07-2024 clarified that no such record is in the custody of the undersigned.
4. No Mala Fide Intent:
I wish to clarify that there has been no mala fide intent, deliberate denial, or negligence on my part. The non-submission of the information was solely due to non-custodianship and non-availability of the records with me. I have always Page 17 of 21 extended full cooperation to the PIO and higher authorities in dealing with RTI matters.
5. Prayer for Relief:
In view of the facts submitted above, I humbly request the Hon'ble Commission to consider my limited role, non-custodianship, active participation in the hearing, and sincere conduct, and therefore kindly drop the penalty proceedings under Section 20(1) and 20(2) of the RTI Act against me. Conclusion:
I assure the Hon'ble Commission of my complete commitment to upholding the provisions of the RTI Act and maintaining transparency and accountability in public service. I remain at your disposal for any further clarification or compliance.
Submitted respectfully for your kind consideration."
Decision in respect of Second Show-Cause proceedings:
XIII. Perusal of the documents submitted by the Noticees- Shri Yogesh Chandra Pandey, Senior Scientific Officer (Chemistry Division) & Purchase Officer-II, Dr. CP Singh, Assistant Director (Physics) and Shri Kailash Kumar, Junior Forensic Assistant Chemical Examiner (CFD), reveals that in compliance to the previous direction of the Commission passed vide order 11.06.2024, the Respondents' office made sincere efforts to locate the requisite information pertaining to noting and correspondence copies of the files with regards to purchase of Video Measurement Set, UFED physical pro-ruggedized kit, High Speed Forensic Workstation and 06 UFED with cloud analyzers but the same is not available in their records and in order to substantiate their statement, suitable explanations has been provided by them and the same have been taken on record. At this juncture, the Commission observes that only such information as is available and existing and held by the Noticees or is under their control can be provided by them. In view of the above discussion, the Commission accepts the reply/explanation of the Noticees as given in this para namely Shri Yogesh Chandra Pandey, Senior Scientific Officer (Chemistry Division) & Purchase Officer-II, Dr. CP Singh, Assistant Director (Physics) and Shri Kailash Kumar, Junior Forensic Assistant Chemical Examiner (CFD), and SCN issued to them are hereby dropped.Page 18 of 21
XIV. During the hearing, it became clear from the submissions made by all the Respondents that the record holder of the relevant information was indeed the then PIO himself namely Dr. SK Paul, who deliberately remained absent in the present proceedings. It is established that he tried to mislead the Bench through the explanation rendered on 19.07.2024 by giving false information. The present PIO Dr. Puneet Puri has apprised the Bench of the fact that no records or files pertaining to the information sought in the instant RTI Application particularly purchase files were handed over to him by the then PIO, Sh. S.K. Paul. Despite several verbal reminders, the said officer failed to provide any official records. This matter was also brought to the cognizance of the Principal Director, FSL and a Show Cause Notice has been issued to the then PIO Sh. S.K. Paul for not complying with the mandatory procedure of handing over charge along with records vide letter dated 18.06.2025.
XV. It is pertinent to mention that the Commission vide its order dated 27.02.2024, has issued a Show Cause Notice against Shri S. K. Paul, S.S.O. under Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act and also directed him to provide the relevant and complete information to the Appellant. But till date, complete information has not been provided to the Appellant. The Commission is irked to note that the PIO's onus of replying to the instant RTI Application is being passed on like a football from one office to another. The Commission further notes that even after the lapse of more than 2 years of time, the Respondent Public Authority is yet to ascertain the actual custodian of the information. The Commission treats this as a blatant error and a willful violation of the provisions of the RTI Act for which the Respondents are admonished. The written explanation provided by Shri SK Paul is nothing but an eyewash. He tried to mislead the Bench by transferring RTI Applications to different offices but he himself was the record holder of the information as per the submissions made by the present PIO Dr. Puneet Puri.
XVI. In view of the above, inaction on the part Shri S. K. Paul, the then PIO is prima facie established. The act of the then PIO is deliberate, and mala fide is established on his part and therefore, the Commission finds it a fit case for imposition of penalty under provisions of section 20 (1) of RTI Act. Hence, a penalty of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand only) is hereby imposed on Dr. SK Paul. This penalty amount shall be deducted Page 19 of 21 from salary of Shri S. K. Paul, by the Public Authority and paid by way of demand draft drawn in favor of "PAO, CAT", New Delhi, forward the demand drafts addressed to the Deputy Registrar (CR-II), email: dyregcr2- [email protected] Room No. 106, First Floor, Central Information Commission, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi 110067. The aforesaid penalty amount should reach the Commission by 30.07.2025. The First Appellate Authority to ensure compliance of the directions and also send a copy of this order to the concerned Drawing & Disbursement Officer, under intimation to the Commission, for necessary action.
XVII. Notwithstanding the above, the Commission would also like to point out that the penalty amounts to Rs. 25,000/- was imposed on Shri K C Varshney, vide order dated 11.06.2024 and Ms. Deepa Verma, Director and Shri S. K. Paul were directed to ensure its compliance. But till date, no compliance has been made by either Shri K C Varshney or Ms. Deepa Verma, Director or Shri S. K. Paul to the Commission whether the said amount has been deposited or not. Ms. Deepa Verma, Director was also directed to ensure supply of complete information to the Appellant but to no avail. It is pertinent to mention that Ms. Deepa Verma, Director, adopted a casual approach in dealing with the directions of the Commission. She has not bothered to check/verify as to whether the directions of the Commission were duly complied with. It establishes that her conduct is nonserious and has adopted a lackadaisical approach towards the provisions of the RTI Act as well as towards the Commission. In view of the above, mala fide is established on the part of Ms. Deepa Verma, Director. Thus, the Commission deems it expedient to direct the Registry of this Bench to issue Show Cause Notice to Ms. Deepa Verma, Director, as to why maximum penalty should not be imposed under Section 20(1) and 20(2) of the RTI Act, for not complying with the directions of CIC. The Registry of this Bench is directed to issue show cause hearing notice to both the parties and post the instant matter on later date.
XVIII. The present PIO Dr. Puneet Puri is also directed to provide complete and correct point-wise information to the Appellant on his abovementioned RTI applications as soon as the concerned files are handed over to him by his predecessor preferably before the next date of hearing.
Page 20 of 21XIX. A copy of this order is also marked to the Principal Director/FSL, who shall ensure compliance of the orders of the Commission.
The instant matter be re-listed on 06.08.2025 and a third Show Cause Proceedings shall be heard on the next date.
Registry of this Bench to ensure listing.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स"ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
Principal Director FORENSIC SCIENCE LABORATORY HOME DEPARTMENT, Govt. of NCT of Delhi Madhuban Chowk, Rohini Sector-14, Delhi-110085 The FAA FORENSIC SCIENCE LABORATORY, ROHINI SECTOR-14, DELHI-110085 Page 21 of 21 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)