Central Information Commission
Shankar Prajapati vs Delhi Police on 11 June, 2021
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/DEPOL/A/2019/124853
Shri Shankar Prajapati ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Delhi Police /Outer North Delhi Distt.
Thana Samaypur Badli Bhawan,
1st Floor, Sector 18, Rohini,
Delhi -110042
Date of Hearing : 10.06.2021
Date of Decision : 11.06.2021
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Y. K. Sinha
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 25.01.2019
PIO replied on : 22.02.2019
First Appeal filed on : 15.03.2019
First Appellate Order on : -
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 24.05.2019
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 25.01.2019 seeking information on the following points:Page 1 of 3
The PIO vide letter dated 22.02.2019 informed the Appellant as under:
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 15.03.2019 which remained unheard. Feeling 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 ACP/ PG for PIO and Dy Commissioner of Police, Outer North District vide letter dated 03.06.2021 wherein it was stated that the first appeal was decided vide order dated 08.04.2019. As per the report of the SHO, Shahabad Dairy received through ACP, Bawana, a case FIR No 431/17 dated 27.07.2017 u/s 406/ 420/ 506/ 34 IPC was registered on the complaint of Sh Devanand S/o Shiv Charan and investigation on the FIR had been completed and draft charge sheet was prepared. The information sought by the Appellant could not be provided u/s 8 (1) (h) of the RTI Act.
In order to ensure social distancing and prevent the spread of the pandemic, COVID-19, hearing through audio conference was scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties.
The Appellant participated in the hearing through audio conference. At the outset he denied the receipt of the FAA order and stated that the information sought has been refused on the pretext that the charge sheet has not been filed, till date.Page 2 of 3
The Respondent represented by Shri Manish Ladla, ACP, Bawana participated in the hearing through audio conference. He stated that the draft sheet has been prepared in the matter. However, since the FIR is filed u/s 406/420/506/34 of the IPC, the draft charge sheet has been sent to the Prosecution Branch for perusal but the same has not been returned back as the prosecution branch is not operational due to lockdown. Shri Ladla furnished a copy of the FAA order dated 08.04.2019 to the Commission subsequent to the hearing wherein a copy of the report of SHO/ S.B. Dairy was also enclosed.
Decision Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, the Commission directs the PIO and Dy Commissioner of Police, Outer North District to provide a copy of their written submission dated 03.06.2021 together with all the annexed documents to the Appellant by 30.06.2021.
With the above direction, the instant Second Appeal stands disposed off accordingly.
Y. K. Sinha ( वाई. के . िस हा) Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . िचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 3 of 3