Central Information Commission
Mrs.Amersh Sharma vs Border Security Force on 6 January, 2014
Central Information Commission
Room No. 306, 2nd Floor, 'B' Wing, August Kranti Bhavan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
Web: www.cic.gov.in Tel No: 26180512
Case No. CIC/SS/A/2013/001729
Dated:6.1.2013
Name of the Complainant: Ms Amresh Sharma
Name of the Public Authority: Border Security Force
Date of Hearing: 9.12.2013
ORDER
1. The appellant is present for the hearing. The respondent was represented by Shri Vikash Chandra (DIG,Pers).
2. The appellant filed an RTI application dated 6.3.2013 addressed to PIO, B.S.F H.Q, Lodhi Road, New Delhi seeking information in relation to complaint lodged against Mr. Kailash Chand , D.I.G (Udaipur) in the year 2009. The appellant submits that she was examined along with other witnesses by G.S.F.C and so seeks copies of the following documents that were part of the proceeding in the said G.S.F.C:
i) Complaint lodged by Mrs Amresh Sharma
ii)Charge-sheet against Mr. Kailash Chand, D.I.G (Udaipur)
iii) Statements of all the P.W (prosecution witnesses) examined by the G.S.F.C
iv) statements o all the D.W (defence witnesses) examined by the G.S.F.C
v) All the exhibits produced in the G.S.F.C
vi) Judgement by G.S.F.C
3. The CPIO vide reply dated 20.3.2013 informed the appellant that the required information cannot be provided as the information sought does not fall within the ambit of section 24. The appellant filed first appeal dated 10.4.2013 on the grounds that the information sought is excluded from this exemption as all information pertaining to allegations of corruption and human right violations are excluded from this exemption given to B.S.F. The first appellate authority vide order dated 29.4.2013 held that B.S.F being a security organization listed in second schedule of the Act has been given exemption from providing information under section 24 of the RTI Act 2005 except the information related to human rights violation and the allegations of corruption and also that your case is not covered under the aforesaid exceptions. The appellant submits in second appeal that after death of her husband in the year 1997 Mr. Kailash Chand (D.I.G, SHQ BSF Udaipur, Tripura, elder brother of her late husband) married her in a temple in the year 2000 in Triyat, Jammu and Kashmir, promising that it will be recognized socially at Ghaziabad, where the appellant resides. The appellant further states that he made sexual intercourse with the appellant and also got her pregnant twice and he got it aborted. The appellant states that since she was illiterate, Mr Kailash Chand grabbed all the ancestral and her late husband's properties.and money during this time, some of which he sold and some transferred in his name. The appellant filed a complaint in relation to the same in BSF HQ, New Delhi on june 18, 2009 against Mr. Kailash Chand and that based on charge-sheet made against Mr kailash Chand, G.S.F.C trial was held at STS BSF, New Delhi wherein the appellant was examined along with other witnesses before G.S.F.C. The appellant submits that since the judgement of GSFC was inappropriate justice for the appellant and that the appellant would like to appeal in the civil court and for that the information is required.
4. During the hearing the respondent has clarified that the said G.S.P.C has now concluded and the appropriate action has also been taken. The appellant submits that the BSF has not even provided a copy of the final result of the said enquiry report. The appellant submits that the information sought pertains to allegations of corruption and human rights violations.
5. The respondent has apprised the Commission that the chargesheet filed by BSF in this regard was under section 493 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant has made two fold allegations in her RTI application. Firstly, the offence in relation to which the chargesheet has been filed by BSF and secondly the appellant alleges and submits that her ancestral properties have been grabbed in an illegal manner by Mr Kailash Chand and transferred in his own name and also sold some of them. The Commission is of the view that the information sought in the second part of her application pertain to allegations of corruption. Looking into the factual matrix of the present appeal and furtherance of transparency in such matters, the Commission hereby directs the CPIO to provide the copies of documents sought at point no. (i) (ii) and (vi) to the appellant . Information sought at point (iii) (iv) & (v) attracts provisions of section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act, 2005 as the appellant has sought copy of statement of all the witnesses on these points.
Sushma Singh Chief Information Commissioner Authenticated True Copy:
(DC Singh) Deputy Registrar Name & Address of Parties:
1. Appellant:
Mrs Amresh Sharma W/o Mr. Kailash Chand, DIG Udaipur, 10-A Maliwara, Ghaziabad, U.P - 201001
2. CPIO/Deputy Inspector General (Pers), Directorate General, Border Security Force, Block No. 10, 5th Floor, C.G.O Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110003
3. The Inspector General (Pers)/FAA Directorate General, Border Security Force, Block No. 10, 5th Floor, C.G.O Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110003