Central Information Commission
Vipul Kumar Rohilla vs Delhi Police on 28 February, 2017
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
Decision No. CIC/SB/A/2016/000490
Dated 21.02.2017
Appellant : Shri Vipul Kumar Rohilla,
A.1/B-70, Janakpuri,
New Delhi-110 058.
Respondent : Central Public Information Officer,
Delhi Police, O/o ADCP-cum-PIO,
Central District,
Daryaganj, Delhi.
Date of Hearing : 21.02.2017
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI application filed on : 15.12.2015
CPIO' reply : 12.01.2016
First appeal filed on : 14.01.2016
FAA's Order : 17.02.2016
Second Appeal filed on : 26.02.2016
ORDER
1. Shri Vipul Kumar Rohilla filed an application dated 15.12.2015 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Central District, Delhi Police seeking information on nineteen points pertaining to FIR No. 93/2008 registered at P.S. Paharganj, New Delhi, including (i) whether it is correct that FIR No. 93/2008 was registered on 24.03.2008 at P.S. Paharganj, New Delhi and (ii) whether a Notice u/s 91 Cr.PC was issued on 20.05.2009 to the Manager, UCO Bank, Paharganj, New Delhi for producing the documents required for the purpose of investigation of the FIR.
2. Shri Vipul Kumar Rohilla filed a second appeal dated 26.02.2016 before the Commission on the grounds that the CPIO, Central District denied the information on the pretext that the desired information is not CIC/SB/A/2016/000490 Page1 available with the Central District as the complete file concerning the FIR has already been sent to the Court of ACMM, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi for judicial verdict and that the FAA upheld the decision of the CPIO. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO, Central District to furnish the information sought by him and take appropriate action against the CPIO and the FAA for not providing the information despite its availability with the officials of the Central District.
Hearing:
3. The appellant Shri Vipul Kumar Rohilla was not present despite notice. The respondent Shri Yashpal Singh, Inspector, Central District, Delhi Police was present in person.
4. The respondent submitted that the appellant was informed vide letter dated 12.01.2016 that the case file has been sent to the Tis Hazari Court on 04.08.2009 and the matter is pending trial. The respondent further submitted that since no documents are available with him, the RTI application of the appellant was transferred to the CPIO, Tis Hazari Court on 12.01.2016 for providing information to the appellant.
Decision:
5. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of the respondent and perusing the records, observes that due information has been provided to the appellant by the respondent. Hence, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the matter.
6. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
7. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
(Sudhir Bhargava) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (V.K. Sharma) Designated Officer CIC/SB/A/2016/000490 Page2