Central Information Commission
Bhupinder Chopra vs Delhi Police on 11 December, 2023
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
के न्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमार्ग, मुनिरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नईदिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
द्वितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/DEPOL/A/2022/149422
CIC/DEPOL/A/2023/114845
Shri Bhupinder Chopra ... अपीलकर्ता/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, Delhi Police, Outer District ...प्रतिवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 11.12.2023
Date of Decision : 11.12.2023
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
Since both the parties are same, the above mentioned cases are clubbed
together for hearing and disposal.
Case RTI Filed CPIO reply First appeal FAO 2nd Appeal
No. on received on
149422 17.05.2022 15.06.2022 13.07.2022 01.08.202 19.10.2022
2
114845 02.11.2022 25.11.2022 14.12.2022 10.01.202 29.03.2023
3
Information soughtand background of the case:
(1) CIC/DEPOL/A/2022/149422 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 17.05.2022 seeking information on the following points:-
"1. The copies of PCR calls which have been received in Central Police Room between the period from 28/05/2020 to 16/05/2022 through following mobile no/s (5) as per ACD system. 9811131048, 9650367724, 9811131098, 9999853818, 9650355810
2. That night of 1April /2 April, 2022 my daughter Ayushi Chopra filed a complaint against me in police station Mianwali Nagar, Paschim Vihar, which resulted in registration of a kalandra (DD no. 019 dated 02/04/2022) against me and I was arrested. Please provide me 2(1) CCTV footage of the police station Mianwali Nagar, Paschim Vihar, Delhi, 110087, From 01/04/2022 at 8 PM to 02/04/2022 at 3 A.M. Page 1 of 5 2(2) Photocopy of the complaint and other papers/documents if any filed by my daughter Ayushi Chopra Against me on 1 April /2 April, 2022 in the police station Mianwali Nagar, Paschim Vihar, Delhi, 110087 2(3) Photocopy copy of the arrest memo"
The CPIO, Outer District, Delhi vide letter dated 15.06.2022 replied as under:-
"1. In this regard, it is intimated that the requisite information asked by you is lengthy, time consuming and requires diversion of manpower for preparation and compiling the same, as the same is not available at a glance. Besides, you can inspect the permissible record under RTI Act-2005 of Police Station Paschim Vihar West of this District on any working day within 10 working days from the date of receipt of this letter between 11.00 AM to 04.00 PM under the provision of RTI Act-2005 for which necessary direction has been issued to concerned. After inspection, you may collect the requisite information/documents from RTI Cell/OD after giving specific detail of documents required under the provision of RTI Act-2005.
2,2(2)&2(3). You can collect the photocopy of requisite information/document(received from ACP/Sub. Div./Paschim Vihar/Outer District and SEM/Courts/OD) from RTI-Cell/Outer District, Pushpanjali, Road No.43, Delhi-110034 on any working day during office hours, after paying a sum of Rs.10/-only, which represent the cost of providing the information, through Demand Draft, Postal Order or cash in favour of the D.D.O., Outer District, Delhi. The cost has been computed @ 2/- per page as per rule of this Act. The total numbers of pages are 05 only.
2(1) As per the report, the CCTV footage older than one month is not available in Police Station Paschim Vihar West."
Another reply dated 21.06.2022 from the PIO, Outer District reveals that the SHO, Pashchim Vihar had sent a reply dated 07.06.2022 furnishing the following specific information:
1. It is stated that the sought information is vast/lengthy/ time consuming requires diversion of manpower and additional work of compilation. It is therefor requested that applicant may please be directed to inspect the relevant record in this regard on any of the working day during working hours with prio permission of senior officers.
2. It is submitted that on 02/04/22, a Kalandra U/S 107/151 CrPC was made against the applicant vide DD No. 19A dated 02/04/22.
(1) The CCTV footage from 01/04/22 at 8 PM to 02/04/2022 at 3 AM is not available at this time as only 30 days of recording storage facilities is available in this police station.
(2) The copy of DD No. 154A dated 01/04/2022 is enclosed herewith. (3) It is further submitted the photocopy of the arrest memo is not available in this police station as the kalandra Ų/S 107/151 CrPC filed in SEM Court for necessary action.
Page 2 of 5Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 13.07.2022. The FAA/DCP, Outer District, Delhi vide order dated 01.08.2022 upheld the CPIO's reply.
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Hearing was scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties.
Appellant: The Appellant was present with his brother Shri Ravinder Chopra Respondent: ACP Nebi Ram and SI Narender Kumar were present from Delhi Police, Outer District during the hearing.
The Appellant's brother contended that the CCTV footage sought at query number 2(1) of the RTI application was not provided by the Respondent. The Respondent explained the PIO's reply on this point was self explanatory, the CCTV footage of 01.04.2022 and 02.04.2022 was sought beyond the period of 30 days, hence the same could not be furnished, as only 30 days of recording storage facilities is available in this police station.
Decision Examination of records of the case and averments made by the parties indicate that information available on record with the public authority, as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, has been duly furnished, in terms of the provisions of the RTI Act. The Respondent cannot be directed to furnish information which does not exist, under the ambit of the RTI Act.
In the given circumstances, the Commission finds no reason to intervene in the appeal at hand. The appeal is disposed off as such.
(2) CIC/DEPOL/A/2023/114845 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 02.11.2022 seeking information on eight points regarding a complaint filed by his daughter in Paschim Vihar West Police Station which resulted in registration of a kalandra (DD no. 019 dated 02.04.2022) against him and he was arrested. He wanted to know the action taken on PCR call made on 01.04.2022, time of arrival and departure and type of vehicle used by ASI Narender Arya and such other information related to his case.
The CPIO, Outer District, Delhi vide letter dated 25.11.2022 replied as under:-
"1 to 5. In this regard the report received from SHO/Paschim Vihar West/OD is enclosed herewith.(02pp)
6. As per the report of Safe-City-Cell/OD till 30 days.
7. In this regard the Standing order received from Safe City-Cell/OD is enclosed herewith.
8. You can approaches to the concerned senior officers i.e SHO, ACP or DCP."Page 3 of 5
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 14.12.2022. The FAA/DCP, Outer District, Delhi vide order dated 10.01.2023 upheld the CPIO's reply, with the following observation:
Contentions put forth by the appellant and reports of the PIO/Outer District, Delhi have been considered. The undersigned has gone through the record placed on file and found that the requisite information has already been provided to the appellant. However, it is pertinent to mention here that a PCR Call was registered at PS Paschim Vihar West on transfere from PS Paschim Vihar East vide DD No. 18A dt. 02.04.2022 the call was initially entrusted to ASI Samarveer No. 500/OD and later ASI Narender 5264/OD took action on both PCR Calls together vide DD No. 19A, dt. 02.04.2022 by preparing a Kalandra. (copy of DD No. 18A, 19A, dt. 02.04.2022 and 154A, dt. 01.04.2022 is attached herewith). The copies of concerned directions/circulars/rules regarding installation and maintenance of CCTV Cameras in Police Station are being attached with this letter. (08pp) No, further action is warranted in this regard herewith.
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Hearing was scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties.
Appellant: The Appellant was present with his brother Shri Ravinder Chopra Respondent: ACP Nebi Ram and SI Narender Kumar were present from Delhi Police, Outer District during the hearing.
During the course of hearing, the Appellant's brother opposed the point wise reply sent by the Respondent. The Respondent stated that report received from SHO/Paschim Vihar West/OD as well the relevant copies of General Diary No. 0019A and Standing order received from Safe City-Cell/OD had been duly furnished to the Appellant. In addition to the aforementioned documents, a copy of the circular in response to the query number 7 has once again been provided by the Respondent to the Appellant during the course of hearing.
Decision In the light of the aforementioned facts of the case and deliberations between parties, it is evident information held by and available on record with the Respondent as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act had been duly sent to the Appellant. In the given circumstances, the Commission finds no requirement for further adjudication or intervention in this case.
The appeal is disposed off accordingly.Page 4 of 5
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालालसामरिया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणित सत्यापित प्रति) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . चिटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)/011-26186535 Page 5 of 5