Central Information Commission
Ajay Kumar vs Cbi on 4 April, 2018
क य सूचना आयोग
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
बाबा गंगानाथ माग
Baba Gangnath Marg,
मु नरका, नई द ल -110067
Munirka, New Delhi-110067
Tel: 011 - 26182593/26182594
Email: [email protected]
File No.: CIC/CBRUI/A/2017/104035
In the matter of:
Ajay Kumar
...Appellant
VS
CPIO and Superintendent of Police, O/o the
Superintendent of Police, Central Bureau of Investigation
EOW, Kali Babu Street, Ranchi, Jharkhand- 834001 ...Respondent
Dates
RTI application : 07.11.2016
CPIO reply : 29.11.2016
First Appeal : 08.12.2016
FAA Order : 27.12.2016
Second Appeal : 16.01.2017
Date of hearing : 09.03.2018
Facts:
The appellant vide RTI application dated 07.11.2016 sought information on three points; whether Dr Chandrabhushan Dubey, Piggery Development Officer was found guilty in Fodder Scam case no. 52(A)/1996, whether there was any prohibitory order on him or his legal representatives against sale/ purchase of immovable properties belonging to them and other related information. The CPIO replied on 29.11.2016. The appellant was not satisfied with the CPIO's reply and filed first appeal on 08.12.2016. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) vide order dated 27.12.2016 disposed of the first appeal. Aggrieved with the non-supply of the desired information from the respondent authority, the appellant filed a second appeal under the provision of Section 19 of the RTI Act before the Central Information Commission on 16.01.2017. Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the desired information.
Interim Order
Appellant : Present
1
Respondent : Shri A.K. Jha,
Additional Superintendent of Police cum APIO, Central Bureau of Investigation, Patna During the hearing, the respondent APIO submitted that they had provided the requisite reply vide their letter dated 29.11.2016 and the First Appellate Authority (FAA)'s order dated 27.12.2016 in which they claimed that CBI is exempted under sec 24 and placed under Schedule II of the RTI Act. He further submitted that information cannot be provided because in some case the information was misused. He was directed to send his submissions in this regard to the Commission at the earliest through e-mail.
The appellant submitted that he was not satisfied with the reply received from the respondent as angles of violation of human rights and large scale corruption are involved in this case. He was requested to send his submissions in this regard.
He submitted that larger public interest is involved in this case as Dr Chandrabhushan Dubey's immovable properties are being purchased by common people although CBI had prohibited the same. He submitted that copies of such letters of prohibition issued by CBI should be provided to the appellant in this regard in the interest of justice & for the knowledge of general public. The CPIO, CBI is directed to bring complete records for perusal of the Commission on the next date of hearing before the CIC.
The registry is directed to fix the next date of hearing in the last week of April 2018 at the CIC building, Room No. 212, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi-110067.
Copies of the order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.
[Amitava Bhattacharyya] Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (A.K. Talapatra) Deputy Registrar 2