Central Information Commission
Tasneem Ahmadi vs Delhi Police on 23 December, 2020
के ीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/DEPOL/A/2019/101370
Ms. Tasneem Ahmadi ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Delhi Police
Date of Hearing : 17.12.2020
Date of Decision : 22.12.2020
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Y. K. Sinha
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 03.11.2018
PIO replied on : 16.11.2018
First Appeal filed on : 05.11.2018
First Appellate Order on : 28.11.2018
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 08.01.2019
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 03.11.2018 seeking information on following 04 points regarding CCTV footage for the incident mentioned in FIR No. 0103 dated 31.10.2018:
1. How many CCTV cameras are installed and monitored by the Police Chowki (Khan Market), to monitor the activities of and around, Khan Market?
2. What are the reference numbers of the said CCTV cameras installed at and around Khan Market?
3. A footage of camera No. 10 relating to the incident mentioned in FIR No. 0103 dated 31.10.2018, is available in one of the car mechanic shops at Khan Market and a footage of camera No. 7 relating to the incident was seen by the police on 31.10.2018 at the Police Chowki (Khan Market) in the presence of the Accused lnder Singh Aswal in FIR No. 0103 dated 31.10.2018. Copies of other CCTV footage pertaining to the attack of the mob on car No. DL 10 CF 7211with lathis and sticks and CCTV footage of all the other Cameras of the area are relevant as the incident relates to mob violence and lynching.
4. Copies of complete Electronic CCTV footage recorded on 31.10.2018 between 4.30 pm to 7:00pm by all CCTV cameras installed and monitored by the Police Chowki (Khan Market), at and around Khan Market.
The PIO, Addl. Dy. Commissioner of Police-I, New Delhi District, vide letter dated 16.11.2018 replied as under:-Page 1 of 3
Dissatisfied with the response received from the PIO, the Appellant filed First Appeal dated 05.11.2018. The FAA cum Dy. Commission of Police, New Delhi Distt vide order dated 28.11.2018 stated as under:-
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
In order to ensure social distancing and prevent the spread of the pandemic, COVID-19, audio hearings were scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties.
The Appellant participated in the hearing on being contacted on her telephone. Explaining the background of the matter, she stated that 16 CCTV cameras were installed in the vicinity of Khan Market Area and the recording of all the cameras for the date and time mentioned in the RTI application was required by her as it pertained to a very serious incident relating to an attack by a mob with lathis and sticks on a car driven by her daughter resulting in mob violence and an attack.
The Respondent is represented by Shri Surender Yadav, ACP through audio conference. He stated that point wise information including the relevant CCTV footage of 3 CCTV cameras i.e. Camera No 1, 7 and 11 was provided to the Appellant. He further stated that the CCTV footage of other cameras has since been deleted since the existing system only supports storage for 15 days. On Page 2 of 3 being queried by the Commission, if the matter is pending adjudication before a Court of Law, Shri Yadav stated that taking into consideration the gravity of the case, the same was transferred to the crime branch and charge sheet in the matter has since been filed. On being queried, regarding the present updated status of the matter, Shri Yadav feigned ignorance and stated that Shri Gurmeet Singh, Inspector , Crime Branch, Chanakyapuri is dealing with the matter and would be able to provide the status of the matter.
Decision:
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, the Commission notes that an appropriate response as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 has been provided by the CPIO since as per the Act only such information which is held and available with the Public Authority can be provided. However, taking into consideration the background behind filing of the RTI application narrated by the Appellant during the hearing, the Commission directs Shri Surender Yadav, ACP to provide the updated status report in the matter to the Appellant after obtaining the same from the actual custodian of information. The above mentioned direction should be complied with by 31.01.2021 under intimation to the Commission.
With the above direction, the instant Second Appeal stands disposed off accordingly.
Y. K. Sinha ( वाई. के . िस हा) Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . िचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 3 of 3