CBI is not fully exempted from sharing info about probes under the RTI Act, Delhi High Court said
The Central Bureau of Investigation, or CBI, is not completely exempt from the purview of the RTI Act and the transparency law permits it to provide information on corruption and human rights violations, the Delhi High Court held.
Perusing Section 24 (Act not to apply to certain organisations) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the High Court said it showed that even though the name of the organisation (CBI) found mention in the Second Schedule to the law, it did not mean that the entire Act does not apply to such organisations.
“The proviso to Section 24 permits information pertaining to allegations of corruption and human rights violation to be made available to the applicant and the same cannot be included in the exception provided to organisations mentioned in the Second Schedule of the RTI Act,” Justice Subramonium Prasad said in an order passed on January 30 and made available late last evening.
The High Court passed the order on a plea by the CBI challenging a November 2019 decision of the Central Information Commission (CIC) directing the agency to provide certain information to Indian Forest Service (IFS) officer Sanjeev Chaturvedi.
Mr Chaturvedi had sought information about alleged corruption in the purchase of disinfectant and fogging solution for the medical store of Jai Prakash Narayan Apex Trauma Centre, AIIMS.
He was the chief vigilance officer of AIIMS at the time when he sent a report regarding the alleged corruption in the purchases being made for the trauma centre.
Besides, Mr Chaturvedi also sought a certified copy of the file noting, documents, or correspondences related to the CBI investigation in the matter.
According to the officer, since the CBI took no action on the information provided by him, he approached the probe agency's Central Public Information Officer (CPIO).
After the CBI declined to furnish the information, he approached the CIC which ordered the central agency to share the details. The CBI then approached the High Court challenging the CIC's order.
The CBI argued that Section 24 of the RTI law acts as a complete bar and the agency is exempt from the provisions of the Act.
It contended that the proviso to Section 24 does not apply to CBI and the agency cannot reveal the details of an investigation it conducted.
The federal probe agency said intelligence played a very vital role in its investigation of offences of corruption, and many important and sensitive cases were registered based on intelligence inputs. Therefore, it cannot disclose the details of the investigation to Mr Chaturvedi, the CBI said.
The High Court said Mr Chaturvedi sought information regarding his complaint alleging corruption in the purchase of fogging solution and disinfectant for the store at the trauma centre and was not a case where sensitive information was collected and the disclosure of which would be prejudicial for the officers involved.
“This is also not a case where information is so sensitive that it cannot be shared with the public at large. The very purpose of the proviso is to permit information pertaining to allegations of corruption and human rights violations to be provided to the applicant,” it said.
“In the absence of anything on record to demonstrate that investigation regarding malpractices in the purchase of cleaner disinfectants and fogging solution in JPNA Trauma Centre, AIIMS, New Delhi will expose the officers and other persons involved in the investigation which can endanger their life or would jeopardise any other serious investigation, this court is not in a position to accept the argument of the CBI in the facts of this case,” the court said.
The court, however, held in appropriate cases, it is always open for the CBI to establish that the information sought about a particular investigation is sensitive, and on considering the nature of sensitivity involved and keeping in mind the object of Section 24 of the RTI Act, it is always open for the CPIO to refuse grant of such information.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)