Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Sujith S. Nair vs Delhi Police on 18 August, 2025

Author: Heeralal Samariya

Bench: Heeralal Samariya

                                     के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
                            Central Information Commission
                                 बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
                            Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                             नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/DEPOL/A/2024/625947

Shri Sujith S. Nair                                              ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
                                    VERSUS/बनाम

PIO, Delhi Police, South East District                       ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing                          :    13.08.2025
Date of Decision                         :    13.08.2025
Chief Information Commissioner           :    Shri Heeralal Samariya

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on          :           20.06.2023
PIO replied on                    :           07.07.2023
First Appeal filed on             :           26.05.2024
First Appellate Order on          :           12.06.2024
2ndAppeal/complaint received on   :           20.06.2024

 Information sought

and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 20.06.2023 seeking information on the following points:-

"This is to inform that I have a lodged a Cyber Cell complaint on 10th August, 2022 via National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal having its registration number 20808220048582 current status of the complaint stands closed with a irrelevant remarks by the SHO Cyber Cell, New Delhi Do note reason for lodging the Cyber Cell complaint was my personalized details such as photos, screenshots, SMSs, WhatsApp voice and video calls were getting leaked publicly across New Delhi and other parts of the country wherein phone hacking, SIM cloning, Spoofing, Intercepting of phone calls and SMSs technique were used to do keen monitoring of me and my wife's movements this activity was carried out with the help Delhi Police and Cyber Police officials the aforesaid act was intentionally initiated by the lady Smt Sreekala Nair without any permission or written approval from Ministry of Home Affairs as a part of normal routine practice or a standard protocol the aforesaid act is conducted for unknown suspects or infiltrators who is intentionally involved in unlawful and suspicious activity due to which a national peace is getting disturbed which is considered as a part of national threat.

In view of the above, the aforesaid Cyber Cell complaint got reopened having its new registration number 20808220048582 till date no resolution or action has been invoked against the accused."

The CPIO, replied vide letter dated 07.07.2023(as per the FAA's order), copy of which was not attached in the Second Appeal.

Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 26.05.2024. The FAA, DCP, South-East Dist vide order dated 12.06.2024 replied as under:-

"This is an order regarding disposing off an Appeal dated 26.05.2024 preferred by Mr. Sujith S Nair(hereinafter called the Appellant). Add- RZ-2700A/29 Street Tughlakabad Extension New Delhi-110019, which was forwarded by Nodal Officer, Delhi Police and received in the office of the undersigned on 29.04.2024, through online portal vide DEPOL/A/E/24/00896 against the reply of PIO/SED issued vide letter No ID-1065/24/5140/RTI Cell/South-East District, New Delhi, dated 07.07 2023 The Appellant has mentioned in his Appeal that he is not satisfied with the information provided to him and requested to provide correct & complete sought information, under RTI Act. 2005.

The Appellant had moved an RTI application dated 20.06.2023 which was received of the PIO (Addl DCP)/SED on 23.06.2023 through online portal vide DEPOL/R/E/24/05748 for seeking information, under the Right to Information Act, 2005. The reply of PIO (AddI. DCP)/SED has been sent to Appellant vide letter No.ID-1065/24/5140/RTI Cell/South-East District, New Delhi, dated 07.07.2023, on the basis of report of SHO/ Cyber Police Station/South-East District through speed post, under the RTI Act, 2005. The undersigned has carefully gone through the contentions/submissions of the Appellant put forth in the Appeal. Hence, the copy of fresh report provided cyber police station of South-East District is enclosed herewith which is self explanatory"

Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

An email dated 14.04.2025 has been received from the Appellant wherein he has not discussed the merits or facts of the case, but stated as under:

"This is with reference to captioned subject, the undersigned/appellant/ complainant wish to apprise that without an appropriate response /reply of 2nd appeal registered/appealed by an appellant/complainant from Central Information Commission (CIC) hearing dates can't be released/ notified do note same can only be processed/notified/released if an appellant/complainant further appeals for the same in-case not satisfied with the response/reply of 2nd appeal received from Central Information Commission (CIC)."

Written submission dated 06.08.2025 has been received from the PIO, South East District reiterating the aforementioned facts.

Hearing was scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties.

Appellant: Refused to attend even hearing even through audio conference Respondent: ACP/Sub-Division/Cyber Mr. Dalip Singh, SHO/Cyber Inspr. Pankaj Kumar were present during hearing.

The Appellant refused to make submissions even when he was contacted over telephone. The Respondent submitted an undated document purportedly a report about the complaint of the Appellant stating that in the absence of any details regarding the complaint, facts about what data had been leaked, no offence in the nature of cyber crime was found. Hence, the enquiry of case number 20808220048582 had been duly closed.

Decision:

Perusal of records of the case reveals that the information available on record with the public authority and defined as information under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, has been duly provided by the Respondent.

The Respondent-SHO/PS/SED is directed to send a copy of the written submission dated 06.08.2025 with a copy of the report as submitted during the course of hearing to the Appellant, within two weeks of receipt of this order and submit a compliance report in this regard before the Commission within one week thereafter. Since the response of the PIO is found legally tenable and well within the precincts of the RTI Act, no further intervention is warranted in this case, under the RTI Act.

The appeal is disposed off accordingly.

Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . नचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 3 of 3 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)