Central Information Commission
Shri Sanjay Dhall vs Deputy Commissioner Police (Dcp) East on 6 March, 2009
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2007/01477 dated 3-12-2007
Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19
Appellant: Shri Sanjay Dhall
Respondent: Deputy Commissioner Police (DCP) East
FACTS
By an application of 9-5.-5007 Shri Sanjay Dhall of Laxmi Nagar, Delhi applied to Shri Ajay Choudhary, DCP (East) District seeking information on action taken on fifteen complaints made by him against Smt. Chandra Devi W/o Late Janak Raj Kumar and Shri Deepak Kumar, S/o Late Janak Raj Kumar and complaints made by Smt. Chandra Devi against him. In this matter he received the following reply from Shri Ajay Choudhary, PIO and DCP (East) dated 1.6.2007.
"1&2 Your complaints have been enquired into which revealed that the matter is of civil nature. Further, preventive action u/s 107/150 Cr. PC has also been taken in this regard. The allegations levelled in your complaint do not attract any cognizable offence; hence no police action is warranted at this stage. Your complaints have been filed.
3. Complaints made by Smt. Chandra Devi have also been enquired into and the matter is found to be of civil nature. Moreover, she has filed a civil suit in the Hon'ble Court of Shri Sudesh Kumar, Civil Judge, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in this regard and the same is pending trial. No police action is warranted at this stage."
Not satisfied with this reply appellant Shri Sanjay Dhall moved his first appeal before Shri Alok Kumar Verma, JCP. Shri Alok Kumar Verma, JCP, New Delhi Range in his order of 19.7.2007 has directed as follows:-
"I have examined all the relevant records. The appellant was heard in person on 18.8.07. The APIO/ East District and Addl. SHO/ Shakarpur, who are well conversant with the matter under reference, also attended the hearing. I find the PIO/ East District has provided comprehensive information to the appellant. The appellant has requested to provide him details of the enquiries undertaken on various complaints filed by him against Smt. Chandra Devi and others. The appellant further requested to provide copy of statements of witnesses recorded during the course of enquiries along with copy of complaint made against 1 him by Smt. Chandra Devi. I am asking PIO/ East District to provide you the gist of the enquiries undertaken.
As regards the information relating to the third party, the PIO/ East District is being asked to issue notice to third party u/s 11 of RTI Act, 2005 inviting the third party to make a submission in writing or orally whether the information should be disclosed to the appellant. The outcome of the notice will be apprised to you by the PIO/ East District."
Appellant's prayer before us in his second appeal is as below:-
"It is respectfully prayed that the PIO should be directed to provide all the information along with the documents sought in the initial application. It is further prayed that the details of the proceedings may please be intimated to the applicant."
In an annexure to his appeal he also remarks that "the reply of the PIO is vague and no supportive documents as requested. "
The appeal was heard on 19-2-2009. Following are present.
Appellant Shri Sanjay Dhall Respondents Shri Ganga Sahai, ACP/HQ/E. Shri V. K. Dham, SHO/ SP.
ACP Shri Ganga Sahai submitted that he has complied with the orders of First Appellate Authority through his letter of 6.9.2007 in which he has stated as follows:-
"No cognizable offence was made out during the course of enquiry, however, preventive action u/s 107/150 IPC was taken on 29.8.2004 against Smt. Chandra Devi and her son Deepak. On 14.2.2006 a PCR call regarding quarrel between you and Deepak S/o Smt. Chandra Devi was received at PS Shakarpur and HC Amar Pal reached at the spot and both of you were medically examined. The result on both MLCs was given simple blunt by doctor hence, the case was filed. Civil case as well as complaint case is pending in the court. As the matter is subjudice hence no police action was made out on your complaints and the same were filed.
Copies of complaint filed by Smt. Chandra Devi against you and statements of witnesses recorded during the course of enquiry can not be provided to you u/s 11 of RTI Act, 2005 being third party information as denied by the concerned persons."2
Shri Sanjay Dhall has submitted that this was to be public enquiry and what he seeks is a copy of the complaint and a copy of the statement on witnesses required by him in the civil Suit being contested between the parties.
DECISION NOTICE The issue here is the disclosure of certain information held by the DCP (East), the disclosure of which has been objected to by the third party. Normally as defined in section 2 (j) a citizen has the right to access any information held by or under the control of the public authority. The exception will come in case of information concerning a third party "which relates to or has been supplied by the third party as has been treated as a confidential by the third party "(underlined for emphasis).
In this case it stands admitted that both the complaint and the statement have been supplied by a third party. The key issue therefore is whether it has been treated as confidential by the third party. From what we gather the complaints in connection with which the documents have been sought are now closed. Moreover, it appears that a public enquiry has been conducted in this matter, not one that was either confidential or secret. Under the circumstances we are unable to understand the reason for invoking section 11 (1) of the RTI Act.
On the other hand we find that what appellant Shri Sanjay Dhall has sought in his first appeal are details which go well beyond what he has asked for in his initial applications which were DD entries, statement recorded and final disposal. Final disposal has been provided in all cases. It is the DD entry and the statement recorded that are additions.
Appellant Shri Dhall's prayer before us also has three components of the information sought:-
1. Documents sought in the initial application.
2. Details of the proceedings.
3. the last piece has not been asked for in the initial application.3
In light of the above we, therefore, hereby direct that the DD entries and such statements of witnesses as is sought by appellant Shri Dhall are provided to him within 15 working days of the date of receipt of this decision notice. The appeal is thus allowed in part. There will be no costs.
Reserved in the hearing, this appeal is announced on this sixth day of March 2009. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Wajahat Habibullah) Chief Information Commissioner 6-3-2009 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.
(Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar) Joint Registrar 6-3-2009 4