Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

22. Their stand was accepted by the SIC, by way of impugned order, going by the distinction made between Crime Branch of the CID (CBCID) and SBCID. The functional difference between the two Departments were noted by the SIC, which also states that ‘the powers that be’, in their wisdom, have chosen to bring CB-CID within the ambit of the RTI Act while exempting SB- https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CID from it. The said wisdom is not to be called in question before the Commission, the SIC concludes.

23. The SIC thus concludes that the exemption of SBCID was total and absolute unlike in the case of CBCID. Thus, the earlier instance where the CBCID had been directed to furnish information was different and such a conclusion would not impact or affect the decision to be taken in the context of SBCID. The operative portion of the order reads thus:

9. The SB-CID is structurally and functionally quite different from the CB-CID. The SB-CID forms the impression on the basis of the materials gathered by them through their own inbuilt instrumentalities and it does not have legal consequences unless it is followed by actions contemplated as per law. May be that SB-

CID's report might end as a report or further action might be pursued on the exigencies of the situation which emerge from the materials available in the report of the SB-CID. This, by no stretch of imagination, could be equated to the functions performed by the CB-CID which is invariably entrusted with the job of investigation and may be followed by prosecution. Thus, functionally these two entities stand apart from each other. The powers that be, in their wisdom, have chosen to bring CB-CID within the ambit of the RTI Act while exempting SB-CID from it. The said wisdom is not to be called in question before this Commission. Thus, it is demonstrably clear that the exemption of SB-CID is total and absolute unlike in the case of CB-CID. In the earlier case, information has been ordered to be furnished inasmuch the information sought for related to CB-CID and not SB-CID. At the risk of repetition, it may be pointed out that SB- CID's report is impressionistic whereas that of CB-CID is not as indicated supra.

1. Home (Police.VII) Department

2. Home (SC) Department”

25. To that end, the observation of the SIC that ‘The powers that be, in their wisdom, have chosen to bring CB-CID within the ambit of the RTI Act while exempting SB-CID from it’ is incorrect, since both the CBCID and SBCID are notified as organizations to which the RTI Act will not apply subject to the application of the provisos to Section 24(4) of the Act.