Central Information Commission
Ms.Surabhi Chopra vs Ministry Of Defence on 15 July, 2010
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 308, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New
Delhi-110066
File No.CIC/LS/A/2010/000890
Appellant Ms. Surabhi Chopra
Public Authority Indian Army
(through : Col. A.K. Vyas and Col.
Bhupinder Singh.
Date of hearing 15.07.2010
Date of decision 15.07.2010
Facts :-
The matter is called for hearing today dated 15.07.2010. Appellant present. The Public Authority is represented by the officers named above.
2. It is noticed that vide RTI application dated 30.12.2009, the appellant had requested for the following information :-
"1. Whether any Executive Magistrate exercised his or her powers to disperse an assembly using the Armed Forces under section 130 of the Criminal Procedure Code 1973 ?
2. If so, please give a copy of the Orders. In addition, please give any information, including but not limited to, correspondencfe, files, file notings, or other documents where the exercise of these powers is discussed, before or after the powers were actually exercised.
3. Please give me this information in relation to the following episodes of communal violence :-
i. In Nellie, Morigaon district, Assam on or after 18 February 1983. ii. In Kandhamal, Orissa between 24 August 2008 to 31 Octobher 2008.
iii. In Bhagalpur district, Bihar from 22 October 1989 to 31 December 1989 iv. In Gujarat, between 27 February 2002 to 31 October 2002. v. In Delhi, between 31 October 1984 to 7 November 1984. vi. In Marad, Kerala, on or after 3 January 2002 and on or after 2 May 2003.
4. Whether, any commissioned or gazetted member of the Armed Forces exercised his or her powers to deisperse an assembly using Armed Forces under his or her command under section 131 of the Criminal Procedure Code 1973 ?
5. If so, please give a copy of the Orders. In addition, please give any information, including but not limited to, correspondence, files, file notings, or other documents where the exercise of these powers is discussed, before or after the powers were actually exercised.
6. Please give me this information in relation to the following episodes of communal violence :
i. In Nellie, Morigaon district, Assam on or after 18 February 1983. ii. In Kandhamal, Orissa between 24 August 2008 to 31 October 2008.
iii. In Bhagalpur district, Bihar from 22 October 1989 to 31 December 1989.
iv. In Gujarat, between 27 February 2002 to 31 October 2002. v. In Delhi, between 31 October 1984 to 7 November 1984. vi. In Marad, Kerala, on or after 3 January 2002 and on or after 2 May 2003."
3. It appears that the CPIO gave no response to the appellant whereupon she filed the first appeal. The matter was decided by the First Appellate Authority vide order dated 18.3.2010 wherein he directed the appellant to approach the respective State Governments. Para 04 of the order is extracted below :-
"4. AND NOW THEREFORE, after having heard the views of representatives and having personally perused the relevant record, I direct the applicant to approach respective State Government."
4. In the appeal memo filed before the Commission, the appellant has, inter- alia, pleaded that if the Army has this information in relation to the incident show-cased on the website, it follows that it necessarily has this information for the comparable incidents mentioned in the RTI application. She has, therefore, called upon the Army authorities to cull out this information and supply it to her.
5. The queries raised in the RTI application can be divided into two parts. Paras 01, 02, & 03 concern the use of Armed Forces by the Executive Magistrates under section 130 of the Cr.PC. During the hearing, the appellant clarifies that she simply wishes to know whether the District Magistrates/Executive Magistrates had requisitioned the Armed Forces at the given locations during the time frame specified in the RTI application and if yes, what was the response of the Armed Forces thereto i.e. whether the Armed Forces came to the assistance of the civil administration or declined to do so. The appellant also wishes to know that if the Army did go in assistance of the civil administration, the date(s) thereof may be indicated to her. The second part concerns paras 04, 05, & 06 of the RTI application. These paras relate to the exercise of powers by the Commissioned/Gazetted officers of the Armed Forces under section 131 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is noteworthy that the officers of the Armed Forces exercise such powers only when no Executive Magistrate is available on the spot and where the public security is manifestly endangered.
6. Col. Vyas submits that some of the incidents took place more than 25 years back and, therefore, culling out this information would be time consuming and it is also quite possible that some of the requested information may not be available.
7. The appellant, however, does not share this perception. She is not prepared to believe that records relating to the exercise of powers by the Commissioned officers of Army under section 131 would not have been maintained by the concerned units of the Army.
DECISION
8. In my opinion, the information requested for by the appellant is not barred from disclosure under any provision of the RTI Act. At the same time, I cannot be unmindful of the difficulties expressed by Col Vyas in collecting and collating this information due to flux of time and the huge resources to be invested in this enterprise. Even so, Col. Vyas is hereby directed to supply the requested information to this appellant in 10 weeks time.
Sd/-
(M.L. Sharma) Central Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO of this Commission.
( K.L. Das ) Assistant Registrar Address of parties :-
1. The CPIO, RTI Cell, ADG AE G-6, D-1 Wing, Sena Bhawan, Gate No. 4, IHQ of MoD(Army), New Delhi-110011.
2. Ms Surbhi Chopra, B-68, 2nd Floor, Sarvodaya Enclave, New Delhi-110017.