NEW DELHI, Jan 12:
A person can use the RTI Act to access an information even if it is available through any other route, Delhi High Court has ruled.
The court, in a landmark order which will impact number of RTI cases of similar nature, allowed a petition seeking disclosure of communication between Urban Development Ministry officials with those of CBI–an exempted organisation–in a corruption case.
In a recent order, Justice Vibhu Bakhru also said that section 8(1)(h) of the Act–which allows an organisation to withhold such information that impedes the process of investigation, apprehension and prosecution–cannot be imposed without giving proper reasons to justify the denial.
Allowing the petition seeking disclosure of communication between the Ministry and CBI, he dismissed the order given by Information Commissioner M A Khan Yusufi who had agreed with the Ministry to deny information on the grounds that its disclosure would impede the process of prosecution.
Justice Bakhru said neither the first appellate authority nor the Central Information Commission considered how the information sought for would impede the process of probe, apprehension or prosecution of the petitioner, an accused.
He rejected the Ministry’s argument that during trial, the material relied upon by the prosecution would be provided to the applicant, thereby no prejudice would be caused to him.
“In my view this cannot be a ground to deny information to the petitioner. First of all, the question whether the information sought by the petitioner is relevant or necessary, is not relevant or germane in the context of the Act; a citizen has a right to information by virtue of Section 3 of the Act and the same is not condition on the information being relevant,” he said.
He said the fact that the petitioner has access to the material relied upon by the prosecution does not prevent him from seeking information, which he considers necessary for his defence.
The order also dismissed the impression that information from an exempted organisation cannot be disclosed as it allows disclosure of communication exchanged between Director CBI, CVC and officials of Urban Development Ministry and file notings before declining sanction to prosecution of a CPWD officer in a corruption case.
According to section 24 of the RTI Act, information “held by” exempted organisations on corruption and human rights violations are not exempted from the Act, but the organisations have been citing this clause to deny RTI response, causing problems for the petitioners.
The order also said “mere perception or assumption” that disclosure of information would impede the investigation, apprehension or prosecution of an accused was “not enough” to withhold the records by an investigation agency.
Dismissing the most common reason cited by investigation agencies to deny information–that its disclosure would impede the process of investigation, apprehension and prosecution of offenders, Justice Bakhru said, “merely citing that the information is exempted under section 8(1)(h) of the Act would not absolve the public authority from discharging its onus as it required to claim such an exemption”. (PTI)
Follow our WhatsApp channel