Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Veena Manchanda vs Delhi Police on 14 August, 2019

                               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/2018/130691


Veena Manchanda                                            ... अपीलकताग/Appellant


                                     VERSUS
                                      बनाम


CPIO, O/o The Addl Dy.                                    ...प्रनतवािी /Respondent
Commissioner of Police-I cum
Public Information Officer, Delhi
Police, South West District,
Vasant Vihar, Delhi-110057


Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

RTI : 20.12.2017             FA     : 27.02.2018              SA      : 15.05.2018

CPIO : 16.01.2018            FAO : 15.03.2018                 Hearing : 07.08.2019


                                    ORDER

1. The appellant filed an online application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Addl Dy. Commissioner of Police cum Public Information Officer, Delhi Police, South West District seeking information on thirteen points pertaining to four thefts that took place in the Apartment block in Section A, Pocket C, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi including, inter-alia, details of the four FIR's lodged vide No. 0382 dated 12.07.2017, No. 0519 dated Page 1 of 4 29.08.2017, No. SD-VKN-00674 dated 13.12.2017 and No. NIL dated 18.12.2017, regarding the identification of the thieves, names of the suspects along with their residential address and occupation.

2. The appellant filed a second appeal before the Commission against the information received from the CPIO, on the ground that the information provided is incomplete, opaque, non-transparent and has been provided partially. The appellant is not satisfied with the reply of CPIO. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the information sought by her for each FIR separately.

Hearing on 07.08.2019:

3. The appellant Ms. Veena Manchanda and the respondent Shri Raman Kumar, ACP (Vasant Kunj), Delhi Police were present in person.

4. The appellant submitted that she has not received satisfactory information with regard to the information sought from the respondent. The appellant submitted that there have been repeated instances of theft/burglary in their premises, and till date no statement of suspects have been taken by the respondent. The appellant further submitted that the phone number of the IO and the Beat Constables provided by the respondent are incorrect. The appellant further submitted that she had given to the respondent photographs of some people taking photographs of her house, and these people must have been identified and investigated by the Police. However, she was informed that the investigation was in progress. Therefore, the information provided by the respondent is incorrect and improper.

5. The respondent submitted that pointwise reply was provided to the appellant vide letter dated 16.01.2018. The appellant, however, filed an appeal before the FAA. The FAA vide his order dated 15.03.2018 directed the CPIO to reconsider the appellant's RTI application and a comprehensive pointwise information be provided to the appellant. Accordingly, a fresh reply in compliance with the order of the FAA was furnished to the appellant vide letter dated 06.04.2018. The respondent admitted that they do maintain a register of Bad Characters in the locality/ offenders who have committed such offences. They had also interrogated such offenders, however, no disclosure was made by any of the interrogated offenders. Subsequently, they had filed an 'untraced' report in the matter. The respondent reaffirmed that information, as available on records, was furnished to the appellant.

Decision:

6. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of the parties and perusing the records, observes that a pointwise reply was furnished to the appellant in compliance with the FAA's direction. However, the appellant is not satisfied with the CPIO's reply. The Commission, therefore, directs the respondent to allow the appellant to inspect all relevant records pertaining to the information sought vide her RTI application on a mutually decided date and time as per the provisions of the RTI Act and to obtain photocopies of the requisite documents, free of charge upto 50 pages. The Commission also directs the respondent to provide a copy of the 'untraced' report prepared by the respondent in the matter to the appellant. The above directions shall be complied with, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.

8. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-

Sudhir Bhargava (सुधीर भागगव) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) दिनांक / Date 13.08.2019 Authenticated true copy (अनभप्रमानित सत्यानपत प्रनत) S. S. Rohilla (एस. एस. रोनिल्ला) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 / [email protected] Addresses of the parties:

1. The First Appellate Authority, O/o Dy. Commissioner of Police South West District, Vasant Vihar New Delhi- 110057

2. The Public Information Officer, O/o Addl. Dy. Commissioner of Police-I cum PIO South West District, Vasant Vihar New Delhi- 110057

3. Ms. Veena Manchanda, Page 4 of 4