Central Information Commission
Pritam Bhattacharya vs Bar Council Of India on 6 June, 2022
Author: Saroj Punhani
Bench: Saroj Punhani
के ीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग , मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/BCOIN/C/2020/693788
Pritam Bhattacharya ....िशकायतकता /Complainant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Bar Council of West Bengal,
RTI Cell, 2 & 3, K.S Roy Road,
City Civil Court Building, 7th Floor,
Kolkata - 700001, West Bengal. .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 21/04/2022
Date of Decision : 25/05/2022
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 10/10/2020
CPIO replied on : Not on record
First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 24/11/2020
Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 10.10.2020 seeking the following information:
".....Provide me the point wise certified documents of sr. no 2 and Demand Draft of Rs. 10+1 crores as a part payment of compensation of my financial & survival losses under bribe tie up, brutal, khaki uniformed judicial terrorism and 1 robberies of advocate Smt. Jaya Sarkar, Arefuzzaman and their team under the umbrella of unfair trade practice.
1. I, Pritam Bhattacharya, Executive Engineer/Lt. Col (ulp), submitting this u/s 18 of the RTI Act 2005 toward justice pl,
2. Being victim of planned, brutal, cut money tie up, khaki uniformed, judicial terrorism & robberies of advocate Smt. Jaya Sarkar & Arefuzzaman of Bar Council of West Bengal, you are hereby requested to provide me following documents :- a. Cancelation of the Bar Council Registration permanently of advocate Smt. Jaya Sarkar, Shri Alakesh Pal, Arefuzzaman, Hamidum Mazid Mallik against their bribe tie up khaki uniformed, judicial terrorism & robberies on me b. Payment of compensation of Rs. 10 crores of my financial & survival losses under unfair trade practice & bribe tie up, brutal, khaki uniformed, judicial terrorism & robberies of advocate Smt. Jaya Sarkar, her Shri Alakesh Pal along with return of all items, gold jewelries, cashes encroached from my residence & repair of my residential house damaged by min'm 1000 times, brutal raids of her bribe tie up police and judges to upgrade her pet call girl. c. Cases status w.e.f. 12/3/2012 upto today of 2020 on www.ecourts.gov.in of Criminal and Civil Court Berhampore, Murshidabad of West Bengal against this Pritam Bhattacharya.
d. Court Orders w.e.f. 12/3/2012 upto today of 2020 on www.ecourts.gov.in of Criminal and Civil Court Berhampore, Murshidabad of West Bengal against this Pritam Bhattacharya.
e. FIR Sheet 13956 dated 12/3/12-13.45 hrs duly highlight (i) Round Seal of Berhampore PS, (ii) Service No of I/C PS, (iii) Signature on sr. no 14 of FIR sheet of the plaintiff Smt. Amrita Sanyal, daughter of Shri Amar Kr. Sanyal. f. Voter, Ration, Aadhaar card of the witnesses have statements against me on 12/3/12, 15/4/12 and Voter, Ration, Aadhaar card of the writers of cases of Smt. Amrita Sanyal, wife of Shri Mrinal Bag, daughter of Shri AK Sanyal. g. Divorce paper in lieu of confirmation of legal separation in between Shri Mrinal Bag & his wife Smt. Amrita Sanyal.
h. Voter, Ration, Aadhaar card of 38+ Smt. Amrita Sanyal, wife of Shri Mrinal Bag, daughter of Shri Amar Kr. Sanyal of village Nowda, appended with residential address and name of Pritam Bhattacharya as her husband.
i. Discharge certificate of the concerned Hospital / Nursing Home, Medical papers, VAT invoices of Medicines and Bill of ambulance concerned with the allegation of 38+ call girl of village Nowda named Smt. Amrita Sanyal (wife of Shri Mrinal Bag, daughter of Shri AK Sanyal "on 12/3/12 -12.00 hrs she had extreme pull down state with incapability to stand & walk at my bed room...when she asked food & water then I had torture on her..".2
j. Arrest memos, medical papers, seizer lists, W/As, w.e.f. 12/3/12 upto today of 2020 concerned with my handcuff parades, lock up tenures, imprisonments at jail with restriction on production before CJMs, JMs & District Judges. k. All notices served before me this respondent & rest all papers of following cases, registered against me by advocate the Smt. Jaya Sarkar (i) GR-978112 of Berhampore PS 394, 494, 498A case 305/12 dated 1213112-1345 hrs, (ii) MR- /2012 to pay Rs. 35,000/- per month Maintenance before the call girl Smt. Amrita Sanyal, wife of Shri Mrinal Bag of village Nowda as per her affidavit 59 dated 26/3/12, (iii) Misc 180/12 of District Social Welfare Office Domestic Violence case 510/SW/En dated 5/6/12, (iv) Execution 1950/15, Exec-1950116, Exec-1950117, Exec-1950/18, Exec-1950/19, (v) Matrimonial Suit 553/15, (vi) Misc 3350/18 of judicial robbery u/s 94 of Cr. PC.
I. All order sheets & judgments passed against me w.e.f. 12/3/2012 upto today by the CJM, JM 3rd & District Judges Murshidabad on stated cases of advocate Smt. Jaya Sarkar representing wife of Mrinal Bag as my wife. m. All papers of case NGR 4180 dated 1417/20 of Berhampore PS case No 1124 & 1159 registered against me by advocate Arefuzzaman and his junior Hamidum Mazid Mallik.
n. Payment of compensation of Rs. 1 crore of my financial & survival losses under unfair trade practice & bribe tie up, brutal, khaki uniformed, judicial terrorism & robberies of advocate Arefuzzaman, his junior Hamidum Mazid Mallik along with return of my laptop, gold chain, smart phone and cash Rs. 15,000+ encroached by Arefuzzaman. Medical papers of Super Specialist Govt. Hospital with expert reports and scientific evidences are self explanatory."
Having not received any response from the CPIO, the complainant filed a complaint to the Commission.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Complainant: Present through intra-video conference.
Respondent: Pinaki Ranjan Banerjee, Assistant Secretary & CPIO present through video conference.
The CPIO invited attention of the bench to his detailed written submissions filed on 02.03.2022, copy of which was also endorsed to the Complainant wherein it has been affirmed that the averred RTI Application was never received in their office. Further, the CPIO has emphasized on the repetitive RTI Applications filed 3 by the Complainant while also alleging that none of these seek information as envisaged under the RTI Act and seem to be stemming from his desire to satisfy personal vendetta.
The Complainant objected to the submissions of the CPIO and also relied on his written submissions filed before the hearing.
Decision The Commission at the outset observes that the facts placed on record by the Complainant are extremely cumbersome to comprehend. Further, the RTI Application does not strictly conform to Section 2(f) of the RTI Act while also exceeds the word limit prescribed under Rule 3 of RTI Rules, 2012. In this regard, the attention of the Appellant is drawn towards an observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) & anr. v. Aditya Bandhopadhyay and others [(2011) 8 SCC 497] stating that:
"37. The right to information is a cherished right. Information and right to information are intended to be formidable tools in the hands of responsible citizens to fight corruption and to bring in transparency and accountability. The provisions of RTI Act should be enforced strictly and all efforts should be made to bring to light the necessary information under clause (b) of section 4(1) of the Act which relates to securing transparency and accountability in the working of public authorities and in discouraging corruption. But in regard to other information,(that is information other than those enumerated in section 4(1)(b) and (c) of the Act), equal importance and emphasis are given to other public interests (like confidentiality of sensitive information, fidelity and fiduciary relationships, efficient operation of governments, etc.). Indiscriminate and impractical demands or directions under RTI Act for disclosure of all and sundry information (unrelated to transparency and accountability in the functioning of public authorities and eradication of corruption) would be counter-productive as it will adversely affect the efficiency of the administration and result in the executive getting bogged down with the non- productive work of collecting and furnishing information. The Act should not be allowed to be misused or abused, to become a tool to obstruct the national development and integration, or to destroy the peace, tranquility and harmony among its citizens. Nor should it be converted into a tool of oppression or intimidation of honest officials striving to do their duty. The nation does not want a scenario where 75% of the staff of public authorities spends 75% of their time in collecting and furnishing information to 4 applicants instead of discharging their regular duties. The threat of penalties under the RTI Act and the pressure of the authorities under the RTI Act should not lead to employees of a public authorities prioritising 'information furnishing', at the cost of their normal and regular duties."
Now, the CPIO has adequately explained their inaction on the instant RTI Application, per contra, the Complainant across the length and breadth of his written submissions has merely narrated statements regarding the grievances he is harbouring as reflected in the contents of the RTI Application, none of which concern the mandate of the RTI Act.
Having observed as above, the Commission finds the instant complaint bereft of merit.
The Complaint is dismissed accordingly.
Saroj Punhani(सरोजपुनहािन) Information Commissioner (सू सूचनाआयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणतस"यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ,उप-पंजीयक दनांक / Date 5