Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Robin Zaccheus vs Cbi on 25 March, 2026

                                      केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
                            Central Information Commission
                                 बाबा गंगनाथ मागग,मुननरका
                             Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                                 नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/625340 +
                                       CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/625102 +
                                       CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/629449

Robin Zaccheus                                                     ... अपीलकताग/Appellant


                                      VERSUS
                                       बनाम

CPIO: Central Bureau of
Investigation, New Delhi                                         ...प्रनतवािीगण/Respondents

Relevant dates emerging from the appeals:

 Sl. No.   Second      Date of     Date of             Date of        Date of    Date of
           Appeal      RTI         CPIO's              First          FAA's      Second
           No.         Application Reply               Appeal         Order      Appeal


    1.     625340      10.04.2025      06.05.2025      06.05.2025 27.05.2025 03.06.2025

    2.     625102      17.04.2025      19.05.2025      20.05.2025 31.05.2025 01.06.2025

    3.     629449      14.04.2025      15.05.2025      15.05.2025 31.05.2025 28.06.2025



The instant set of appeals have been clubbed for decision as these relate to the same
subject matter.

Date of Hearing: 10.03.2026
Date of Decision: 17.03.2026




CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/625340 & Ors.                                                      Page 1 of 12
                                          CORAM:
                                   Hon'ble Commissioner
                                 _ANANDI RAMALINGAM
                                        ORDER

Second Appeal No. CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/625340

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 10.04.2025 seeking information on the following points:

1. A copy of the arrest warrant, memo, or written authorization issued by CBI for the arrest of Kalvakuntla Kavitha on April 11, 2024, in Tihar Jail, including the date and time of issuance and execution.

2. Copies of records or log entries confirming compliance with Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), detailing how and when Kalvakuntla Kavitha was informed of the grounds of her arrest on April 11, 2024.

3. Copies of notices or communications sent by CBI to Kalvakuntla Kavithas family or legal representatives regarding her arrest on April 11, 2024, as mandated under CrPC or CBI Manual, if documented.

4. A copy of the application submitted by CBI to the Special Court, Delhi, seeking permission to arrest and interrogate Kalvakuntla Kavitha in Tihar Jail (under ED custody), along with the courts order granting such permission, dated between April 1 and April 11, 2024.

5. Copies of official correspondence or requests between CBI and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) regarding the transfer or coordination of Kalvakuntla Kavithas custody between March 15, 2024 (ED arrest), and April 11, 2024 (CBI arrest), excluding exempt investigative details.

6. Records of any objections or clarifications sought by the Special Court from CBI regarding the timing or necessity of the arrest on April 11, 2024, as documented CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/625340 & Ors. Page 2 of 12 between April 11 and April 30, 2024.

7. Copies of CBIs custody register or interrogation log entries specifying the dates, times, and locations of Kalvakuntla Kavithas questioning between April 11, 2024, and August 27, 2024 (bail date), ensuring compliance with CrPC Section 41D (right to consult a lawyer).

8. Records of medical examination reports or health check certificates of Kalvakuntla Kavitha conducted by CBI during her custody period from April 11 to April 26, 2024, as per CrPC Section 54 and CBI Manual guidelines.

9. Copies of CBIs applications to the Rouse Avenue Court, Delhi, for custody or remand of Kalvakuntla Kavitha between April 11 and April 26, 2024, along with court orders approving or rejecting such requests, highlighting any noted procedural delays. Chargesheet Filing and Procedural Timeliness

10. A copy of the chargesheet or supplementary chargesheet filed by CBI against Kalvakuntla Kavitha in the Delhi Excise Policy case, as submitted to the court by April 1, 2025, or a record confirming the filing date if completed.

11. Records of any extensions sought by CBI from the court under CrPC Section 167(2) for filing the chargesheet beyond the 90-day period from April 11, 2024 (arrest date), along with court approvals or rejections, up to August 27, 2024 (bail date).

12. Copies of internal CBI correspondence or notes, if any, explaining delays or challenges in filing the chargesheet against Kalvakuntla Kavitha by July 10, 2024 (90-day deadline), as held by your authority. Post-Arrest Procedural Oversight

13. A copy of CBIs affidavit or response filed in the Supreme Court opposing Kalvakuntla Kavithas bail plea, submitted before the bail order of August 27, 2024, including any court observations on procedural lapses noted therein.

14. Records of any internal CBI review, audit, or disciplinary inquiry initiated between April 11, 2024, and April 1, 2025, regarding procedural compliance in Kalvakuntla Kavithas arrest and custody, if conducted.

1.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 06.05.2025 and the same is reproduced as under :-

"In this regard, it is informed that the information sought by you is not being provided claiming exemption U/s 8(1) (h) of RTI Act 2005. It is further information that CBI is an exempted organization under RTI Act, 2005, as it is covered under Second Schedule as per Section 24(1) of the Act and vide Notification No. 1/3/2011-1R dated 09.06.2011 of DoPT has been placed at SI. No. 23 thereof."

1.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 06.05.2025 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 27.05.2025 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.

1.3. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 03.06.2025.

Second Appeal No. CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/625102

2. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 17.04.2025 seeking information on the following points to more than one Public Authority:

➢ I, Robin Zaccheus, a citizen of India and holder of a Below Poverty Line (BPL) card, humbly submit this application under Section 6(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, seeking vital information from your respected department. This request concerns the Indian Government's actions on the U.S. Department of Justice's November 2024 indictment (USA v Adani et al, 24-CR-433) against Gautam Adani CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/625340 & Ors. Page 4 of 12 and others, alleging ₹2,029 crore in bribery and fraud, widely discussed on X and impacting India's markets. As a BPL citizen, I seek this data to ensure our nation's wealth, tied to ₹25,000 crore in bonds--is not misused, fulfilling PM Modi's anti- corruption vow.

D. To Central Bureau of Investigation.

9. Has CBI received U.S. DOJ evidence on the ₹2,029 crore Adani bribery claims by April 10, 2025. List evidence types & non-exempt probe steps, excluding Section 8(1)(a) data.

10. Has CBI asked the U.S. DOJ or New York court for updates on USA v Adani et al (24-CR-433) under Judge Garaufis. Share non-exempt updates received by April 10, 2025.

2.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 19.05.2025 and the same is reproduced as under :-

"It is to be informed that vide Notification F. No. 1/3/2011-IR dated 09.06.2011 of the Govt. of India, issued u/s 24 of the RTI Act 2005, the Central Bureau of Investigation has been put at Sl. No. 23 of the Second Schedule to Right to Information Act, 2005, subject to the provisions of Section 24 of the said Act. The information sought by you, vide your RTI application referred above, does not pertain to any specific case of corruption or violation of human rights; hence, your RTI application is accordingly disposed of."

2.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 20.05.2025 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide combined order dated 31.05.2025 upheld the reply given by the CPIO and the contents thereof are reproduced as under:

"The Appellant Shri Robin Zaccheus, 37-93/49, Sainik Vihar Road NO.1, Neredmet X Roads, Secunderabad-500056 has filed 1st online Appeals (04 nos.) CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/625340 & Ors. Page 5 of 12 dated 15.05.2025 (Regn. No.CBIMH/A/E/25/00057), dated 15.05.2025 dated (Regn.No.CBIMH/A/E/25/00058), and dated 20.05.2025 (Regn.No.CBIMH/A/E/25/00070) against the reply of AIG (P)-I & CPIO, Policy Division, sent vide letter dated 15.05.2025 & 19.05.2025 in response to his RTI applications dated 14.04.2024, 16.04.2025, 17.04.2025 & 21.04.2024 (through online Regn. Nos. CBIMH/R/E/25/00310, Regn.No.CBIMH/R/E/25/00313, Regn. No.CBIMH/R/T/25/00054 & Regn.No.CBIMH/R/E/25/00336). 20.05.2025 (Regn.No.CBIMH/A/E/25/00069)

2. I have carefully considered the original RTI requests dated 14.04.2025, 16.04.2025, 17.04.2025 & 21.04.2025 and Appeal dated 15.05.2025, 15.05.2025, 20.05.2025 and dated 20.05.2025 and the reply of the CPIO given vide letter dated 15.05.2025 & 19.05.2025.

3. After examination of all the documents/records produced, the undersigned is of the view that the replies given by AIG (P)-I & CPIO, CBI, Policy Division on 15.05.2025 & 19.05.2025, are in order.

4. The Appeals dated 15.05.2025 (02 Appeals) and dated 20.05.2025 (02 Appeals) are accordingly disposed of.

5. The Second Appeal against the decision shall lie with the Central Information Commission, Baba Gang Nath Marg, Near Staff Quarters, Old JNU Campus, Munirka, New Delhi-110067 within ninety days from the date of issue of this order."

2.3. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 01.06.2025.

Second Appeal No. CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/629449

3. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 14.04.2025 seeking information on the following points:

➢ I, Robin Zaccheus, a citizen of India and a Below Poverty Line (BPL) cardholder, respectfully submit this application under Section 6(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, to seek a celestial revelation of truth regarding any requests made by the Andhra Pradesh Government to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for an enquiry into the death of Pastor Praveen Pagadala. On March 25, 2025, Pastor Praveen Pagadala, a revered Christian preacher, met a tragic end near Kontamur village in Rajamahendravaram while traveling on a Royal Enfield motorcycle. The Andhra Pradesh Police, in a press meet on April 12, 2025, concluded that his death was a road accident at a speed of 70 kmph, with injuries consistent with a fall, supported by forensic evidence and evidence of alcohol purchases en-route. Yet, the cosmic fabric of justice trembles with doubts, as the Joint Action Committee (JAC) and the public have raised concerns of a staged accident, potential hit-and-run, and unaddressed motives, suggesting possible lapses in the police investigation. In the celestial expanse of righteousness, the CBI stands as a beacon of impartiality, capable of illuminating the shadows of doubt. As a BPL citizen, I seek this information in the public interest to ensure that the Andhra Pradesh Government has taken steps to uphold justice by involving the CBI, aligning this investigation with the universal principles of fairness, transparency, and accountability. Information Sought:

1. Requests for CBI Enquiry by Andhra Pradesh Government:

a. Provide copies of any official correspondence, requests, or notifications received by the CBI from the Andhra Pradesh Government (e.g., Chief Secretary, Home Department, or Chief Minister's Office) for an enquiry into the death of CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/625340 & Ors. Page 7 of 12 Pastor Praveen Pagadala, from March 25, 2025, to April 14, 2025, in the form of existing records.

b. Share details of the date, reference number, and sender of each such request or notification received by the CBI, as per existing records, to confirm whether the Andhra Pradesh Government has initiated such a process. c. If no such requests have been received, provide a statement confirming the same, as per existing records, to clarify the status of CBI involvement as of April 14, 2025.

2. Coordination with Central Government Authorities:

a. Share copies of any correspondence between the CBI and Central Government authorities (e.g., Ministry of Home Affairs, Department of Personnel and Training) regarding the Andhra Pradesh Government's request for an enquiry into Praveen Pagadala's death, from March 25, 2025, to April 14, 2025, in the form of existing records.

b. Provide copies of any notifications issued under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946, or other legal provisions, received by the CBI from the Central Government or Andhra Pradesh Government, authorizing the CBI to take up the investigation of Praveen Pagadala's death, as of April 14, 2025, in the form of existing records.

c. If no such notifications have been received, provide a statement confirming the same, as per existing records, to clarify the legal status of CBI involvement as of April 14, 2025.

3. Status of CBI Involvement:

a. Provide details of whether the CBI has registered a case regarding Praveen Pagadala's death, including the case number and date of registration, if applicable, as of April 14, 2025, in the form of existing records.

b. If a case has not been registered, provide a statement confirming the same, as per existing records, to clarify the CBI's involvement as of April 14, 2025. c. Share copies of any official communications from the CBI to the Andhra Pradesh Government regarding the status of their request for an enquiry, from March 25, 2025, to April 14, 2025, in the form of existing records.

4. Public Interest and Transparency Measures:

a. Share anonymized summaries of any representations or requests received by the CBI from the public, civil society groups, or the JAC for an enquiry into Praveen Pagadala's death, along with the CBI's responses, ensuring compliance with privacy norms under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005, from March 25, 2025, to April 14, 2025, in the form of existing records.

b. Provide details of any public disclosures or press releases issued by the CBI regarding the Andhra Pradesh Government's request for an enquiry into Praveen Pagadala's death, as of April 14, 2025, in the form of existing records. c. If no such disclosures have been issued, provide a statement confirming the same, as per existing records, to ensure transparency in the process. 3.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 15.05.2025 and the same is reproduced as under :-

"It is to be informed that vide Notification F. No. 1/3/2011-IR dated 09.06.2011 of the Govt. of India, issued u/s 24 of the RTI Act 2005, the Central Bureau of Investigation has been put at Sl. No. 23 of the Second Schedule to Right to Information Act, 2005, subject to the provisions of Section 24 of the said Act. The information sought by you, vide your RTI application referred above, does not pertain to any specific case of corruption or violation of human rights; hence, your RTI application is accordingly disposed of."

3.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/625340 & Ors. Page 9 of 12 Appeal dated 15.05.2025 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide combined order dated 31.05.2025 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.

3.3. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 28.06.2025.

Hearing Proceedings & Decision:

4. The appellant remained absent and on behalf of the respondent I.B. Pendhari, Suptd. of Police, A.K. Shahi, Assistant Suptd. of Police, Sandeep Kumar, Deputy Suptd. of Police, attended the hearing in-person.

5. The respondent (CPIOs) while defending their case inter alia endorsed their initial replies in all three appeals. Further, the CPIO stated that apart from the fact that the queries raised by the appellant were speculative in nature, it also consisted of third-party information. Therefore, the same was not divulged with the appellant.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent and perusal of records, observes that the CPIO has timely disposed of the RTI applications in all three cases.

In CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/625340, the CPIO submitted that the investigation in the averred matter is still pending. Besides, the CPIO contended during the hearing that the information also comprised of third-party information. Therefore, the CPIO pleaded exemption under Section 8 (1) (h) and (j) of the RTI Act. Considering the nature of information by the appellant, the Commission finds the final plea taken by the CPIO during the hearing under Section 8 (1) (h) and (j) of the RTI Act, to be appropriate as per the provisions of RTI Act. Further, the CPIO is advised not to plead exemption under Section 24 along with provision(s) laid down under Section 8 (1) of the RTI Act in conjunction to one another, in future.

Furthermore, in light of the submissions of the respondent in the aforementioned appeal wherein it is an admitted fact that investigation in the averred matter is ongoing, the contention of the appellant in his second appeal indicating allegations of corruption as per proviso to Section 24 (1) of the RTI Act, cannot be entirely ruled out. Further, perusal of RTI requests in CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/625102 & CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/629449 reveal that the same are speculative and non-specific in nature, therefore, do not conform to Section 2 (f) of the RTI Act. In view of the foregoing discussion and oral submissions of the respondent regarding the nature of queries, the CPIO is directed to give a revised reply to that effect to the appellant, in CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/625102 & CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/629449, as per the provisions of the RTI Act, within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order, under due intimation to the Commission.

It is further observed that the appellant has filed RTI application in CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/625102 to more than one Public Authority, which is found to be not complying with Section 3 of RTI Rules, 2012. In view of the same, the appellant is advised to refrain from filing a single RTI application by addressing it to multiple public authorities, in future to avoid confusion amongst the Public Authorities. Accordingly, the appeals are disposed of.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-

(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामल ंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) निनां क/Date: 17.03.2026 Authenticated true copy O. P. Pokhriyal (ओ.पी. पोखररयाल) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/625340 & Ors. Page 11 of 12 Addresses of the parties:

1. The CPIO, Head of Branch, Central Bureau of Investigation, Anti Corruption Branch, 5-B, CBI Head Quarter Building, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi - 110003

2. Robin Zaccheus CIC/CBRUI/A/2025/625340 & Ors. Page 12 of 12 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)