Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Vikram Vincent vs National Crime Record Bureau on 28 April, 2023

                                के न्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
                      Central Information Commission
                            बाबागंगनाथमागग, मुननरका
                      Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                        नईदिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/NCREB/A/2022/125819

Dr Vikram Vincent                                          ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
                            VERSUS/बनाम
PIO                                                  ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
National Crime Records Bureau, Mahipalpur,
New Delhi
Date of Hearing                :  27.04.2023
Date of Decision               :  28.04.2023
Chief Information Commissioner      :   Shri Y. K. Sinha

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on            :   18.01.2022
PIO replied on                      :   10.02.2022
First Appeal filed on               :   15.02.2022
First Appellate Order on            :   14.03.2022
2ndAppeal/complaint received on     :   31.05.2022

Information sought

and background of the case:

The Appellant filed anRTI application dated18.01.2022 seeking information on the following 02 points:-

The CPIO/Statistical Officer, National Crime Records Bureau, vide letter dated 10.02.2022 replied as under:-

Dissatisfied with the responsereceived from the CPIO,the Appellant filed a first appeal dated 15.02.2022. The FAA/Joint Director, National Crime Records Bureau, vide order dated 14.03.2022 upheld the reply of the CPIO.

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

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

A written submission has been received from the CPIO and Assistant Director (Statistics), NCRB vide letter dated 24.04.2023 wherein the replies available on record were reiterated.

The Appellant participated in the hearing through video conference. He stated that he required the information for his own independent research purposes and that he could not locate any data on the website of the public authority relating to such cases where Section 377 IPC was invoked in a marital dispute u/s 498A of the IPC for the period 2014-2021.

The Respondent represented by Smt Divya Singh, Assistant Director and Shri Suresh Chand Bohra, Sr Technical Officer participated in the hearing through video conference. Smt Singh stated that only aggregate data that is provided to them by the concerned State Government is available on their record. For the purpose of classification, a matter is recorded only once in their record on the basis of the offence having the highest punishment and that the Appellant can approach the concerned state government in order to obtain the information in the form desired by him. However, she also clarified that the record pertaining to the number of FIRs registered under Section 377 of the IPC for the last 5 years is available on their website.

Decision:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, the Commission is of the view that an appropriate response as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 has been provided by the Respondent. Hence, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the instant matter. For Page 2 of 3 redressal of his grievance, the Appellant is advised to approach an appropriate forum.

With the above observation, the instant Second Appeal stands disposed off accordingly.

Y. K. Sinha (वाई. के . नसन्द्हा) 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