Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Mr. K Thakshinamurthy vs Cbi on 8 January, 2013

                      Central Information Commission, New Delhi
                        File No.CIC/WB/A/2010/000581 & 776­SM
                  Right to Information Act­2005­Under Section  (19)




Date of hearing                        :                                   8 January 2013


Date of decision                       :                                   8 January 2013



Name of the Appellant                  :    Shri K Thakshinamurthy,
                                            CP No. 9982, A Cell - 12,
                                            Central Prison, Madurai - 625 016.


Name of the Public Authority           :    CPIO, Central Bureau of Investigation,
                                            Anti Corruption Branch, Shastri Bhavan,
                                            3rd Floor, Nugambakkam, Chennai - 600 
                                            006.



        The Appellant was present.

        On behalf of the Respondent, Shri Ishwaramurthy, CPIO was present.

Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Satyananda Mishra

2. The   Appellant   was   present   in   the   Madurai   studio   of   the   NIC.   The  Respondent was present in the Chennai studio. We heard their submissions.

3. In   two   separate   RTI   applications,   the   Appellant   had   sought   similar  information relating to the seeking of sanction of prosecution against him. In his  reply,   the   CPIO   had   provided   some   factual   information   but   had   denied   to  disclose   the   copies   of   the   correspondence   made   by   the   CBI   with   the  sanctioning authority including the draft sanction order it had sent on the ground  CIC/WB/A/2010/000581 & 776­SM that it would impede the process of prosecution. He had cited the provisions of  subsection 1(h) of section 8 of the Right to Information (RTI) Act in support of  his   decision.  The   Appellate  Authority   had  endorsed  the   stand  taken   by   the  CPIO.

4. We have carefully considered the contents of the RTI application and the  response  of  the   CPIO.  While  we  agree  with  the   CPIO  that  the   SP's  report  forwarded by the CBI at the time of seeking sanction cannot be disclosed as it  contains   information   which   might   adversely   affect   the   prosecution   pending  before the trial court, the same cannot be said about the draft sanction order, if  any, sent by the CBI to the competent authority at the time of seeking sanction  for prosecution. The CPIO is therefore directed to provide a copy of the draft  sanction order, if any, to the Appellant within 10 working days of receiving this  order.

5. Needless   to   say,   since   in   this   case,   information   has   been   sought  pertaining to allegations of corruption, it would be covered under the proviso to  section 24 of the Right to Information (RTI) Act and the CBI cannot refuse such  information   on   the   ground   that   it   has   since   been   included   in   the   second  schedule of the Act.

6. The appeal is disposed off accordingly.

7. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.

(Satyananda Mishra) Chief Information Commissioner CIC/WB/A/2010/000581 & 776­SM 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.

(Vijay Bhalla) Deputy Registrar CIC/WB/A/2010/000581 & 776­SM