Central Information Commission
Mr.Israil Ali vs Ministry Of Home Affairs on 28 October, 2011
Appeal No.CIC/SS/A/2011/000902
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
B - Wing, 2nd Floor,
August Kranti Bhavan, Bhikaji Cama Place,
New Delhi - 110066
Appeal No.CIC/SS/A/2011/000902
PARTIES TO THE CASE:
Appellant : Shri Israel Ali, Advocate (absent)
Respondent : Assistant Commissioner of Police, ALBR-I, EOW, Crime
branch, Qutab Institutional Area, New Delhi (through
Shri Ranbir Singh, ACP & APIO along with Shri Sanjay,
Inspector and Shri Kumar Kundan, Sub-Inspector)
Date of Hearing : 10/10/2011
ORDER
1. The Appellant through his RTI Application dated 14/12/2010 had sought information on 17 (seventeen) points from the CPIO of the Respondent authority. The contents of the RTI Application are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
2. The subject-matter of the information pertains to one FIR No.36/10 registered at PS EOW, Crime Branch. The CPIO vide his Order dated 12/01/2011 had given a point-wise reply to the various queries raised in the said RTI Application. The substance of the CPIO's reply can be summarized as being that the information sought by the Appellant was exempted from disclosure under Sections 8 (1) (e), (g) and (h) of the RTI Act. 1
Appeal No.CIC/SS/A/2011/000902
3. This is so because, as per the CPIO's Order, the details of the investigation related to FIR No.36/10 had been filed in the form of status report on various dates in the Court of Shri Amit Bansal, Learned ACMM, Patiala House Court, New Delhi, where the matter is being tried. According to the CPIO, the matter is pending investigation and sharing the details of investigation is likely to prejudicially affect the same.
4. As per paragraph 7 and 13 of the CPIO's Order, the matter is being investigated by Shri Kumar Kundan, Sub-Inspector (present during the present hearing) and it pertains to 64 (sixty-four) complaints which have been filed against TDI Infrastructure Ltd. & its Directors in respect of TDI- City Kondli Project. 5 (five) complainants have respectively withdrawn their complaints till date and all the remaining complaints are subject-matter of the ongoing investigation in case of FIR No.36/10.
5. It has been informed by the Respondent's officers during the hearing that the Appellant, who is an Advocate, is appearing on behalf of one of the Complainants before the Learned ACMM at Patiala House Court in the case of FIR No.36/10 and as such, has access to the status report of the ongoing investigation which has been filed by the Respondent authority on various occasions before the said Court.
2
Appeal No.CIC/SS/A/2011/000902
6. The main issue in the present appeal therefore remains whether the various details and documents pertaining to FIR No.36/10 (such as investigation reports; current stage of action taken against the accused; names, designation & addresses of the officers engaged in the ongoing investigation with respect to the complaint filed by the Appellant's client; copies of file noting in relation to the said investigation etc.) maybe provided to the Appellant under the RTI Act or not. The answer to the said issue lies in the negative.
7. The investigation which is in progress under FIR No.36/10 has been registered in furtherance of 64 (sixty-four) complaints received at the PS EOW. The investigation in such matters is likely to take its course and it cannot be precisely determined with accuracy as to when the investigation is going to end. In any case, that is something which the concerned Court where the matter is being tried, has to take note and care of. Even the Sub- Inspector, Shri Kumar Kundan, who is investigating the matter, has submitted that due to the large number of complaints and witnesses involved, the investigation process has consumed the time that it has till now; however, it is very likely to end in the immediate future.
8. The Commission is of the understanding that divulging the information which is being sought by the Appellant is likely to hamper the process of ongoing investigation for two reasons. First, the facts and statements 3 Appeal No.CIC/SS/A/2011/000902 recorded during the ongoing investigations from various witnesses and other sources are intricate in nature given that there have been 64 complaints filed against the same accused, i.e. TDI Infrastructure Ltd. & its Directors. Therefore, investigating into such inextricable and intertwined complaints, all referring to the same subject-matter requires care and supervision. It is hard to determine in such cases what may or what may not be disclosed as "information" under the RTI Act and one has to bear in mind the worst case scenario while deciding such issue.
9. The issue appears to be of serious nature and any such finding of the investigating officer which, if divulged, will possibly enable any of the accused to alter / tamper with any evidence against them, to manipulate witnesses or to interfere with the due process of law, must be exempted from disclosure under the RTI Act. This is also because otherwise, it will lead to frustration of the entire investigation process which has already taken considerable time.
10. Secondly, as submitted by the Investigating Officer himself, the investigation is likely to end in the immediate future and investigation report will be prepared and filed before the concerned Court very soon. It is further to ensure that such a complicated matter which has already taken considerable amount of time to be investigated into, is properly dealt with. 4
Appeal No.CIC/SS/A/2011/000902 Therefore, it is important that no such information with respect to the present investigation is divulged which is likely to prejudicially affect the same. Therefore, the Commission considers the information sought by the Appellant through the present RTI Application to be exempted from disclosure under Section 8 (1) (h) of the RTI Act.
11. The Appeal is accordingly disposed of.
(Sushma Singh) Information Commissioner 28.10.2011 Authenticated True Copies (D.C. Singh) Deputy Registrar Name & Address of Parties:
Sh. Israel Ali, 184, Lawyers Chambers - II, Delhi High Court, New Delhi - 3 The PIO/CPIO, O/o the Asstt. Commissioner of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Crime Branch, C22/23, Quatab Institutional Area, Delhi - 16 The First Appellate Authority, 5 Appeal No.CIC/SS/A/2011/000902 O/o the Asstt. Commissioner of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Crime Branch, C22/23, Quatab Institutional Area, Delhi - 16 6