Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: RAC ticket in Manisha Singh vs Delhi Police on 8 August, 2018Matching Fragments
accused named in the FIR.
5. Certified copies of the rights of the informant/s who is/are not satisfied with the investigation of Investigation Officer.
PIO, Janpad/Ghaziabad has transferred RTI application to CPIO, GRP, Janpad, Moradabad under section 6(3) of RTI Act, 2005. Feeling aggrieved, the Complainant approached the Commission.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Complainant states that matter has been presented in Court but he has not been provided the case diary. The complainant's wife had complained against the theft of their articles by a co-passenger who was travelling on an adjacent seat, on an RAC ticket. The complainant has stated before the Commission that he is dissatisfied and aggrieved with the improper investigation of their complaint, which has led to closure of the case without penalising the culprit. Hence, he sought to examine the case diary prepared by the police, which has not been submitted before the Court.