STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB held in a landmark order that mere the existence of an investigation process could not be a ground for refusal of the information (Chandigarh, 17.12.2014) The State Information Commission Punjab gave one of the landmark order on 09.12.2014 in a RTI Complaint Case filed by the complainant Mr. Kawaldeep Singh against the Public Information Officer, Commissioner of Police, Amritsar, in the very spirit of the protection of Fundamental Human Rights of Citizens and against the Police atrocities while registering the false complaints and keeping the defendants totally cut-off from every information regarding same and delaying the whole process of getting justice due to malafide reasons behind the veils of excuses of pending investigations, and turning the whole process in Justice denied due to delay. In this order, it was held by the Information Commission in line with the judgement of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in W. P. (C) No. 3114/2007 decided on 03.12.2007 – Bhagat Singh versus Chief Information Commissioners and others that mere existence of an investigation process can not be a ground for refusal of the information; the authority withholding information must show satisfactory reasons as to why the release of such information would hamper the investigation process. The SIC also referred two more judgments given by the Central Information Commission submitted by the complainant in this regard to strengthen his claims of information. It was held that the respondent-PIO has failed to deal with the RTI request of the complainant as per provisions of the RTI Act and hence a show-cause be issued to Sh. Babu Lal A. I. G., State Narcotic Central Bureau, Jalandhar under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act. SIC stated in its order that "Sh. Babu Lal Mina, A.I.G., State Narcotic Central Bureau, Jalandhar will show cause under Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act, as to why penalty be not imposed upon him for willful delay/denial in supplying the information to the RTI applicant and why the compensation be not awarded to the information-seeker under the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. In addition to his submission, the PIO is also hereby given an opportunity under Section 20(1) provision, thereto, for a personal hearing before the imposition of such penalty on the next date of hearing. He may note that in case he does not file his submission and does not avail himself of the opportunity of personal hearing on the next date fixed, it will be presumed that he has nothing to say and the Commission will proceed to take further proceedings against him ex-parte. He is also directed to file a status report regarding action taken by him during his period on the RTI request, filed by the applicant which must be accompanied with supporting documents as per official–record before or on the next date of hearing. Sh. Bikrampal Singh Bhatti, IPS, D. C. P.-cum-PIO, Amritsar City, is also directed to file a status report regarding action taken by him filed by the applicant which must be accompanied with supporting documents as per official–record before or on the next date of hearing. He is also directed to send an advance copy of status report to the complainant also."
by
अहं सत्यJoin at
Facebook
