DIG penalised for refusal to provide information to petitioner

A Staff Reporter – The Telegraph

Guwahati, May 31: A senior police official has been fined by the State Information Commission of Assam for refusing to provide information to a petitioner under the Right to Information Act.
The petitioner had formally moved the police officer twice with his plea.
Commission sources today revealed that on May 15, former Guwahati senior superintendent of police S.N. Singh, recently promoted to the post of deputy inspector-general (northern range), was fined Rs 250 a day.
The commission imposed the fine under Section 20 (1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005. The police official was taken to task for failing to furnish the first information report (FIR) sought by complainant Tarun Dey of Bhaskar Nagar within 30 days of receiving the petition.
But more than the penalty imposed on him, the observations made by the commission regarding the functioning of the police force are even more damning.
“This is a sad commentary on the functioning of a public office in a democracy, where the public authorities are expected to be responsive to the people,” states the ex parte order, issued by chief information commissioner R.S. Mooshahary and state information commissioner B.K. Gohain.
The order also stated that the fine should be calculated from the date on which the 30-day period set for furnishing the information begins.
Sources said the commission has also issued summons to Singh to appear on June 6, the next date of hearing, when the senior police official may make his submissions as to why the penalty should not be realised from him as calculated before the hearing.
Neither Singh nor any person representing the office of the SSP was present when the order was passed.
Sources explained that Dey had filed a petition before the chief information commissioner, stating that he submitted two applications, dated December 8, 2006, and January 20, 2007, under the RTI Act before the Guwahati city superintendent of police. They had requested the SP to provide him with a copy of an FIR (an ejahar) dated September 12, 2006, lodged by his wife, Jharna Choudhury, and a copy of the petition withdrawing the same FIR.
Despite the submissions, Dey was not provided a copy of the FIR of September 12, 2006 and a certified copy of the withdrawal petition dated September 13, 2006, by the SP.
Dey also said he had made a number of attempts to meet the city SSP but was refused every time. The commission found that it was a clear case of refusal to provide information to the petitioner.

Source: http://www.cic.gov.in/

How to get information of private entity under RTI?

This information is obtained from following source:

http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/blogs/jps50/154-how-get-information-private-entity-under-rti.html

You can get information pertaining to private entity [private schools, colleges, coop societies/banks, private sector banks and insurance companies, public/private trusts, private service providers, public limited companies etc under section 2 [ f ] of RTI Act. Please follow this procedure:

• Find out the government dept or government regulator with which the private entity is registered or is being controlled or monitored. For example trusts are reporting to Charity Commissioner of the area, mobile service providers to TRAI, private banks to RBI, insurance companies to IRDA, public limited companies to SEBI and Registrar of Companies. Coop Societies/banks report to District Registrar ofCooperative Societies. Schools are controlled by Dist. Education Officer and colleges by university. Majority of private bodies are controlled by one or the other govt. dept/regulator.

• Locate PIO of this government dept/regulator, by visiting concerned website or referring to my blog / file titled “HOW TO LOCATE A PIO UNDER RTI ACT?”

• File application by referring to RTI Rules for format and fees applicable to central govt. [for central govt. dept/regulator like RBI, IRDA, TRAI, SEBI, ROC etc] or concerned state govt. [if department pertains to a state govt].

• Add following as query:
  • Particulars of information required:
  • Please provide me information as per annexed list relating to ____________having Head/Main office at __________________ from your records and also by obtaining from the said entity under section 2 [ f ] of RTI Act 2005, which is reproduced here under for your kind reference.
  • (f)”information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force.

• Attach list of information required by you as annexure to application.

• You need not contact the private entity whose information is being sought. Now you are concerned with the govt. dept/regulator only and its PIO has to provide you the information sought by you.

• Govt. departments or regulators can summon information under different laws from private bodies and the same has to be supplied to you.

• Information barred by sections 8 & 9 of RTI Act cannot be accessed under section 2 [f] also.

Important CIC Decisions

Important CIC Decisions

• CPIO of the Supreme Court pulled up for delayed information and not passing a speaking order.
• Appeal cannot be filed directly with the CIC bypassing the DAA.
• While no department is proscribed from designing an application form;not applying in the prescribed form cannot be the ground for rejection.
• Note sheets containing file notings are an integral part of a file.
• It is true that there is no provision in section 8 of the Act, specifically exempting disclosure of information relating to examination papers;
• When answer papers are evaluated,the authority conducting the exam. And the examiners evaluating the answer papers stand in a fiduciary relationship between each other.
• Such relationship warrants maintenance of confidentiality by both ,of the manner and method of evaluation
• Reasons for rejecting the tender has to be made known.
• Income tax return is in the nature personal information, the disclosure of which may cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of an individual.
• The applicant is performing his normal duties and is not prevented from leading a normal life.
• Request for information under section 7(1) not justified.
• In a single public authority no transfer of application.
• Where the information is not available in the particular form requested, the applicant may be allowed if he desires to inspect the documents.
• The following
  • (a) Copy of the notification for recruitment
  • (b) Recruitment & Promotion policy
  • (c) Panel of names of interviewees and merit list
  • (d) Copy of recommendations of selection committee and its approval be given.
• PAN no.is a personal information and may not be given.
• The following
  • (a) Certified copy of TE statement (paid copy)
  • (b) Certified copy of completed tour itinerary
  • (c) Details of meetings attended during the tour be given
• There is no question of denial of information if a public authority is prepared to provide the documents, in the form in which it is available with them.
• Noting in the despatch register showing the despatch of reply / intimation is not enough.
• There has to be actual receipt.
• Bank account details are not to be disclosed to others.
• RTI Act cannot be confused with an instrument for grievance redressal, although the information obtained can be used for this purpose.
• If information is not available in electronic form,it need not be created.
• The assessment reports by the superior officers are personal and confidential information and therefore exempt under section 8(1)(j).
• If the information seeker asks several questions expecting the CPIO to reply in yes or no,the CPIO ought not do so.
• If there is already a provision for seeking information , the applicant can be advised to obtain the information accordingly. There is no question of denial of information in this case.
• Income tax returns are confidential information,relates to third party and are submitted in fiduciary capacity. However, tax assessment is a public action and there is no reason why such orders should not be disclosed.
• Bio-data submitted in the application for appointment is a public document and can be made available. However, medical reports are purely personal to the individuals and can be denied.
• At the appeal stage, an applicant cannot ask for additional information.
• The appellate authority is right in advising the appellant to give specific details about the information / documents sought from the CPIO.
• The cost effectiveness aspect of disclosure of information ought to be kept in mind.
• Information relating to donations,expenditure on transport and salary drawn by the staff can be disclosed.
• Misuse of RTI Act ought to be discouraged.
• As an enlightened citizen,every information seeker should resort to RTI Act responsibly as most people are doing and reaping the benefit of this powerful act.
• Information relating to future course of action which is not in any material form is not information within the definition of information in section 2(f).
• Inspection of records when the process of recruitment is at the interim stage cannot be entertained.
• The Personal Assessment Forms submitted by the staff to the employer in fiduciary relationship cannot be shared.
• The views recorded in confidence by the peers on the matter of performance appraisal may not be disclosed , since it mat lead to personal acrimony.
• Applicant’s entitlement for information is only in respect of categories of information mentioned in section 2(f).
• It is not open to an applicant to ask, in the guise of seeking information, question to the public authority about the nature and quality of their action.
• The RTI Act does not cast on the public authority any obligation to answer queries with prefixes ,such as why,when,what and whether.
• CSIR case: the applicant asked for the followings;
  • Information on marks awarded to him by each interview committee member, without disclosing their names;
  • The threshold mark fixed by the board for promotion;
  • Permission to inspect the records related to his assessment;
  • Non-appearance and non-filing of written comments by the respondents led the CIC to issue show cause notice to the CPIO for imposition of fine and instruction to DG CSIR to consider disciplinary action the appellate authority; and instructed to provide the requested information
  • On being tendered unconditional apology the CIC reviewed the case and withdrew the notice for the imposition of fine on the CPIO and the recommendation for disciplinary action against the appellate authority.
  • On review, the CIC upheld its earlier decision of providing the information to the applicant.
• The applicant asked for status report on complaints stated to have been made in 499 cases to the Deputy Commissioner and SDM
  • The CPIO replied that all complaints have been ordered to be filed.
  • The decision was upheld by the DAA
  • The reply of the CPIO satisfies the requirement of the act, as the CPIO has only passed on the information available with him regarding the status of the complaints.
  • It is not for the CIC to decide on the propriety of any action taken on applications.
  • The marks awarded by the panel experts to each candidate under different parameters are of confidential nature and this act has been carried out by them in fiduciary capacity, which is exempt u/s 8(1)(e).
  • Disclosure of information i.e agreed list would defeat the very purpose of surveillance which is conducted through the established procedure of preparation of Agreed List.
  • Keeping some body’s name in the agreed list and rewarding him with promotion and higher postings,albeit to non-sensitive post ,on the other are contradictory.
  • There is no reason why the names of officers who were promoted or placed in sensitive positions while they were concurrently under discreet watch i.e “Agreed List” should not be disclosed.
  • Conduct of examinations and for identifying and short listing the candidates in terms of technical competence right attitude,etc is a highly confidential activity.Therefore, answer-sheets should not be disclosed .
  • The award of marks need not be kept secret.
  • True copies of the mark sheets of the successful candidates may be supplied.
  • The onus for timely despatch of replies to the applicant lies on the CPIO alone under section 7(1) of the Act.
  • If found disproportionately diverting resources of a public authority, information can be denied in the form requested but has nevertheless to be made available in any other convenient form.
• Appellant Shri S.C.Sharma requested for a copy of the order, in which the Union Home Secretary had authorised the special Secretary Home to take action under section 5(2) of the Telegraph Act.
  • The information was denied on the ground of being harmful to the security, integrity and sovereignty of India section 8(1) (a).
  • CIC- Authorisation by the Union Home Secretary to specific agencies to intercept telephones would not qualify to attract the exemption undersection 8(1)(a)
  • From the stand-point of technicality of the RTI Act, the role of APIO is limited to only to receiving applications for information and appeals and transmitting the same to the proper CPIO.
• The CIC does not see any legal difficulty in the CPIO using the services of an APIO to transmit the former’s decision;
• This would not lead to any miscarriage of justice or place any undue restriction on an information seeker’s rights under RTI Act.
• It is,however, cautioned that any order issued by the APIO on behalf of CPIO must clearly state that the former was only transmitting the orders of the latter, and should also state the name and the designation of the PIO on whose behalf the APIO might be acting;
• The appellant sought for specific reasons for denial of promotion and benefits of ACP;
• CIC- CPIO was directed to ascertain from the minutes of the DPC as well as the Screening Committee whether any specific reason has been indicated in the minutes regarding the appellant and communicate the same to him within 15 days.
• The appellant sought for the details of the academic and technical qualifications mentioned in the service book, of certain working and retired employees;
• It was denied on the ground of being personal information;
• CIC- it is rather surprising that CPIO and the appellate authority should have taken the view that details of the qualification of govt. officials is personal in nature and as such cannot be supplied;
• It is the right of every citizen to know about the qualifications of public servants and posts held by them,
• Further even the format in which the appellant has sought for the information is so simple that he same would not attract the provisions of section 7(9) of the RTI Act.
• The appellant sought for various information like the address, the dates of and posts from which postal officials had retired, the amount of pension paid for more than 10 years,
• CPIO rejected the information applying the provisions of section 8(1)(i) .
• Upheld by the CIC
• The appellant sought information regarding the income tax return of certain firm;
• The CPIO informed the appellant that the information relates to third party and the documents could be given after the necessary concurrence of third party as per the act;
• Third party objected to the disclosure which was not accepted by the CPIO and the third party was accordingly informed and advised to appeal;
• The DAA agreed with the contention of the third party that the information sought was a personal information and the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest;
• CIC- income tax returns relates to personal information ,submitted in fiduciary capacity, and cannot be disclosed without the concurrence of third party.

Statistics of RTI Data

The claim on the misuse of the laws can only be supported by the actual data. One of the main objectives of our organization is to collect and analyse various data and publish them to the general public.

We have obtained sufficient amount of data and its analysis does show the misuse. Please check the details below:

Data Analysis – 498A in Bangalore

Data Analysis – 498A – India overall

Data Analysis – DV (Under process)

Data Analysis – Divorce (Under process)

Data Analysis – Maintenance (Under process)

Data Analysis – Men lead in Marital Suicides (Courtesy: Arnab, SIF Activist)

RTI Campaign

• Application - 1:Subject :
  • Request for information under Right to Information act-2005 regarding statistics of 498a and section 3 & 4 of the DowryProhibition Act

  Purpose :

  • The purpose is to find out the conviction rate of the cases where 498a is involved.
  • Another purpose is to find out that while the purpose of 498a was to protect women but this is misused by arresting so many women.

  Filed To :

  • Commissioner of Police, Bangalore.

  Filed Date :

  • 15/02/2008

  Current Status :

  • Getting various data from various office of the ACP and police station. This is updated in the RTI Statistics section.

  Summary :

  • The data obtained till now shows that the conviction rate is less than .5 %.
  • The data obtained till now shows that the % of arrested women out of all those arrested is around 30 %.

 

• Application - 2:Subject :
  • Request for information under Right to Information act-2005 regarding “Committee on Reforms of Criminal Justice System” Submitted to Govt. of India, Ministry of Home Affairs by Chairman Dr Justice V S MALIMATH

  Purpose :

  • To expose that even a Govt. of India appointed committee, which was chaired by an eminent Judge finds that 498a is highly misused and recommended to make 498a bailable and compoundable.

  Filed To :

  • Director, Ministry of Home Affairs.

  Filed Date :

  • 01/03/2008

  Current Status :

  • Received following reply from Ministry of Home Affairs:

    “With regard to your letter, I may say that the Law Commission in its 154th report on the code of CrPC, 1973 recommended to make the offence under section 498a IPC compoundable. The Malimath Committee on reforms of criminal justice system also recommended to make the offence under section 498a IPC compoundable and bailable. However it was decided by the Govt. not to accept the same as this would go against the interest of the women”

  Summary :

  • Appealing to the next appellant authority “How making 498a IPC bailable and compoundable will go against the interest of women, when result of RTI 1 clearly shows that 30 % of the arrested people are women.”.

 

• Application - 3:Subject :
  • Request for information under Right to Information act-2005 regarding statistics of 498a and section 3 & 4 of the DowryProhibition Act

  Purpose :

  • The purpose is to find out the conviction rate of the cases where 498a is involved.
  • Another purpose is to find out that while the purpose of 498a was to protect women but this is misused by arresting so many women.

  Filed To :

  • DGP, Karnataka.

  Filed Date :

  • 01/03/2008

  Current Status :

  • No reply till now, probably I addressed to the wrong address. Even though they were supposed to forward to the concerned people under RTI Act

  Summary :

  • Appealing to the next appellant authority for no response within the stipulated 30 days period.

 

• Application - 4:Subject :
  • Request for information under Right to Information act-2005 regarding “Protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005″.

  Purpose :

  • To find out the rational of introducing this act when already women have protection under various IPC sections. Asked a total of 31 questions (These questions will be updated on the website soon).

  Filed To :

  • The Prime Minister’s office, New Delhi.

  Filed Date :

  • 01/03/2008

  Current Status :

  • PMO forwarded the RTI to the Women and Child Welfare Ministry, New Delhi.
  • Got detailed response to the 31 questions from Women and Child Welfare Ministry, New Delhi (These Answers will be updated on the website soon).
  • Got “Statement of objects and reasons from Women and Child Welfare Ministry, New Delhi, which was discussed in parliament” (This will be updated on the website soon).

  Summary :

  • Studying the detailed response to see whether an appeal is to be made or not?

 

• Application - 5:Subject :
  • Request for information under Right to Information act-2005 regarding “Protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005″.

  Purpose :

  • To find out the reaction and action taken by Govt. of India, where Hon’ble Supreme Court has described the “DV Act” as “clumsy wording” and “not very happily worded”.
  • To find out various statistics related to the DV Act.

  Filed To :

  • The Prime Minister’s office, New Delhi.

  Filed Date :

  • 01/03/2008

  Current Status :

  • Got Extract no 17-2/2006-WW, which was sent by “Department of Legal Affairs”, to the “Ministry of women and child welfare”. This is Govt. of India’s reaction to the Suprem court judgment (This will be updated on the website soon).
  • Got detailed response to the 31 questions from Women and Child Welfare Ministry, New Delhi (These Answers will be updated on the website soon).
  • Got “Statement of objects and reasons from Women and Child Welfare Ministry, New Delhi, which was discussed in parliament” (This will be updated on the website soon).

  Summary :

  • Studying the detailed response to see whether an appeal is to be made or not?

 

• Application - 6:Subject :
  • Request for information under Right to Information act-2005 regarding information on “Child Custody” cases filed in family court, Bangalore from 2007-2008.

  Purpose :

  • To find out the trend who is getting most the “Child Custody”.

  Filed To :

  • The Deputy Registrar, High Court of Karnataka.

  Filed Date :

  • 29/03/2008

  Current Status :

  • SIC has directed to furnish information within 60 days in the asked format.

  Summary :

  • SIC has directed to furnish information within 60 days in the asked format.

 

• Application - 7:Subject :
  • Request for information under Right to Information act-2005 regarding information on “divorce” cases filed in family court, Bangalore from 200-2008.

  Purpose :

  • To find out the trend who is winning “divorce”.

  Filed To :

  • The Deputy Registrar, High Court of Karnataka.

  Filed Date :

  • 29/03/2008

  Current Status :

  • SIC has directed to furnish information within 60 days in the asked format.

  Summary :

  • SIC has directed to furnish information within 60 days in the asked format.

 

• Application - 8:RTI 498A – COP-Appeal – http://www.box.net/shared/au1x4t0bs4 – Filed by Suresh

 

• Application - 9:RTI 498A – DGP-Appeal – http://www.box.net/shared/e96fvilkrv – Filed by P Suresh

 

• Application - 10:RTI – CJI – 498aMisuse – http://www.box.net/shared/k3ocmakn3f – Filed by P Suresh

 

• Application - 11:RTI – CJI – Double maintenance – http://www.box.net/shared/9g8nb3p5tb – Filed by P Suresh

 

• Application - 12:RTI – CJKarnataka – Double maintenance – http://www.box.net/shared/il15bug9z3 – Filed by P Suresh

 

• Application - 13:RTI – CJKarnataka – dv misuse – http://www.box.net/shared/tk14pqss5z – Filed by P Suresh

 

• Application - 14:RTI – LAW – Double maintenance – legal affair dept – http://www.box.net/shared/i7beuofbe9 – Filed by P Suresh

 

• Application - 15:RTI – LAW – Double maintenance – legislative dept – http://www.box.net/shared/gndm2f2rra – Filed by P Suresh

 

• Application - 16:RTI – WCD – http://www.box.net/shared/1cln03go2h - Filed by P Suresh

 

• Application - 17:RTI – WCD – Karnataka – http://www.box.net/shared/l404vbn4qe – Filed by P Suresh

 

• Application - 18:RTI-complaint-FC-child-custody-SIC – http://www.box.net/shared/b0dtzeeugn – Filed by P Suresh

 

• Application - 19:RTI-complaint-FC-divorce-SIC – http://www.box.net/shared/6y3qu32uvq – Filed by P Suresh

 

• Application - 20:RTI – High Court – DV Maintenance – http://www.box.net/shared/9vcokxy8l0 – Filed by P Suresh

 

• Application - 21:RTI – Family Court – CrPC 125 – http://www.box.net/shared/y69tpbiq68 – Filed by P Suresh

 

• Application - 22:RTI-Mahesh-MaintenanceOrders – http://www.box.net/shared/qqk3pljv4d - Filed by M Mahesh

 

• Application - 23:RTI – Law Commission – DV misuse – http://www.box.net/shared/2e2bkez68k – Filed by P Suresh

 

• Application - 24:RTI – legal affair dept – DV misuse http://www.box.net/shared/19cjnoicca – Filed by P Suresh

 

• Application - 25:RTI – legislative dept – DV misuse http://www.box.net/shared/vl041aieb4 - Filed by P Suresh

 

• Application - 26:RTI – WCD – DV misuse http://www.box.net/shared/sv7jphe8n9 – Filed by P Suresh

RTI Guide

Object of the Right to Information Act

• The basic object of the Right to Information Act is to empower the citizens, promote transparency and accountability in the working of the Government, containcorruption, and make our democracy work for the people in real sense. An informed citizenry will be better equipped to keep necessary vigil on the instruments ofgovernance and make the government more accountable to the governed. The Act has created a practical regime through which the citizens of the country may have access to information under the control of public authorities.

 

What is information

• Information is any material in any form. It includes records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases. circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form. It alsoincludes information relating to any private body which can be accessed by the public authority under any law for the time being in force.

• A citizen has a right to seek such infonnation from a public authority which is held by the public authority or which is held under its control. This right includes inspection of work, documents and records; taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; taking certified samples of material held by the public authority or held under the control of the public authority.

• The public authority under the RTI Act is not supposed to create information; or to interpret information; or to solve the problems raised by the applicants; or to furnish replies to hypothetical questions. Only such infonnation can be had under the Act which already exists with the public authority.

• A citizen has a right to obtain information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through print-outs provided information, is already stored in a computer or in any other device from which the information may be transferred to diskettes etc.

• The information to the applicant shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought.

• The Act gives the right to information only to the citizens of India. It does not make provision for giving information to Corporations,. Associations, Companies etc. which are legal entities/persons, but not citizens. Howev.er, if an application is made by an employee or office-bearer of any Corporation, Association, ‘Company, NOD etc. who is also a citizen of India, information shall be supplied to him/her, provided the applicant gives his/her full name. In such cases, it will be presumed that a citizen has sought information at the address of the Corporation etc.

 

Exemptions from Disclosure

• The right to seek information from a public authority is not absolute. Sections 8 and 9 of the. Act enumerate the categories of information which are exempt from disclosure. At the same time Sc:hedule II of the Act contains the names of the Intelligence and Security Organisations which are exempt from the purview of the Act. The exemption of the organisations, however, does not cover supply of information relating to allegations of corruption and human rights violations.

• The applicants should abstain from seeking information which is exempt underSection 8 and 9 and also from the organizations included in the Second Scheduleexcept information relating to allegations of corruption and human rights violations.

 

Central Public Information Officers

• Application for seeking information should be made to an officer of the public authority who is designated as Central Public Information Officer (ePIO): All the public authorities have designated their Central Public Information Officers and have posted their particulars on their respective web-sites. This information is also available. on the ‘RTI PORTAL’ (www.rtigov.in). Persons seeking information are advised to refer to the web-site of the concerned public authority or the ‘RTI PORTAL’ for ascertaining the name of the concerned CPIO. If it is found difficult to identify or locate the concerned Central Public Infonnation Officer of a public authority, application may be sent to the Central Public Information Officer without specifying the name of the CPIO at the address of the public authority.

 

Assistance Available From CPIOs

• The Central Public Information Officer shall render reasonable assistance to the persons seeking information. If a person is unable to make a request in writing, he may seek the help of the CPIa to write his application. Where a decision is taken to give access to a sensorily disabled person to any document, the Central Public Information Officer, shall provide such assistance to enable access to infonnation, including providing such assistance to the person as may be appropriate for the inspection.

 

Suo Motu Disclosure

• The Act makes it obligatory for every public authority to make suo-motu disclosure in respect of the particulars of its organization, functions, duties etc. as provided in section 4 of the Act. Besides, some public authorities under the Central Government have published other information and have posted them on their websites.

 

Method of Seeking Information

• A citizen who desires to obtain any information under the Act, should make an application to the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the concerned public authority in writing in English or Hindi or in the official language of the area in which the application is made. The applicant can send the application by post or through electronic means or can deliver it personally in the office of the public authority. The application can also be sent through a Central Assistant Public Infonnation Officer appointed by the Department of Post at sub-divisional level or other sub-district level.

 

Fee for Seeking Information

• The applicant, along with the application, should send a demand draft or a banker’s cheque or an Indian Postal Order of Rs.10/-(Rupees ten), payable to the Accounts Officer of the public authority as fee prescribed for seeking infonnation. The payment of fee can also be made by way of cash to the Accounts Officer of the public authority or to the Central Assistant Public Information Officer against proper receipt.

• The applicant may filso be required to pay fUliher· fee towards the cost of providing the information, details of which shall be intimated to the applicant by the CPIO as prescribed by the Right to Information (Regulation of Fee and Cost) Rules, 2005. Rates of fee as prescribed in the Rules are given below:

  (a) Rupees two (Rs. 2/-) for each page (in A-4 or A-3 size paper) created or copied;
  (b) actual charge or cost price of a copy in larger size paper;
  (c) actual cost or price for samples or models;
  (d) for inspection of records, no fee for the first hour; and a fee of rupees five (Rs.5/-) for each subsequent hour (or fraction thereof);
  (e) for information provided in diskette or floppy rupees fifty (Rs.501-) per diskette or floppy; and for information provided in printed form at the price fixed for such publication or rupees two per page of photocopy or extracts from the publication.

• If the applicant belongs to below poverty line (BPL) category, he is not required to pay any fee. However, he should submit a proof in support of his claim to belong to the below poverty line. The application not accompanied by the prescribed fee of Rs.l 01-or proof of the applicant’s belonging to below poverty line,as the case may be, shall not be a valid application under the Act and therefore, does not entitle the applicant to get information.

 

Format of Application

• There is no prescribed form of application for seeking information. The application can be made on plain paper. The application should, however, have the name and complete postal address of the applicant. Even in cases where the’ information is sought electronically, the application should contain name and postal address of the applicant.

 

Disposal of the Request

• The CPIO is required to provide information to the applicant within thirty days of thereceipt of a valid application, If the infonnation sought for concerns the life or liberty of a person, the information shall be provided within forty-eight hours of the receiptof the request. If the CPIO is of the view that the information sought for cannot be supplied unde~ the provisions of the Act, he would reject the application. However. while rejecting the application, he shall inform the applicant the reasons for . such rejection and the particulars of the appellate authority. He would also inforn). the applicant the period within which appeal may be preferred.

• If an applicant is required to make payment for obtaining information, in addition to the application fee, the Central Public Information Officer would inform the applicant about the details of further fees alongwith the calculation made to arrive at the amount payable by the applicant. After receiving such a communication from the ePIO, the applicant may deposit the amount by way of cash against proper receipt or by Demand Draft or by Banker’s cheque or by Indian Postal Order in favour of the Accounts Officer of the conce:rned public authority. The CPIO is under no obligatiol1 to make available the information if the additional fee intimated by him is. not deposited by the applicant.

• Where an additional fee is required to be paid, the period intervening between the dispatch of the intimation regarding payment of additional fee and payment of fee by the applicant shall be excluded for the purpose of computing the period of thirty days within which the CPIO is required to furnish the information.

• If the CPIO fails to send decision on the request on the information within the period of thirty days or forty-eight hours, as the case may be, the infonnation may be deemed to have been refused.

 

 

First Appeal

• If an applicant is not supplied information within the prescribed time of thirty days or 4S hours, as the case may be, or is not satisfied with the information furnished to him, he may prefer an appeal to the first appellate authority who is an officer senior in rank to the CPIO. Such an appeal, should be filed within a period ‘of thirty days from the date on which the limit of 30 days of supply of information is expired or from the date on which the information or decision of the CPIO is received.

• The appellate authority of the public authority shall dispose of the appeal within a period of thirty days or in exceptional cases within 45 days of the receipt of the appeal.

 

Second Appeal

• If the appellate authority fails to pass an order on the appeal within the prescribed period or if the appellant is not satisfied with the order of the first appellate authority, he may prefer a second appeal with the Central Information Commission within ninety days from the date on which the decision should have been made by the first appellate authority or was actually received by the appellant. The appeal made to the Central Information Commission should contain the following information:

  (i) Name and address of the appellant;
  (ii) Name and address of the Central Public Information Officer against the decision of whom the appeal is preferred;
  (iii) Particulars of the order including number, if any, against vhich the appeal is preferred;
  (iv) Brief facts leading to the appeal;
  (v) Ifthe appeal is preferred against deemed refusal, particulars of the application, including number and date and name and address of the Central Public Information Officer to whom the application was made;
  (vi) Prayer or relief sought;
  (v) Grounds for prayer or relief;
  (vi) Verification by the appellant; and
  (vii) Any other information, which the Commission may deem necessary for deciding the appeal.

• The appeal made to the Central Information Commission should be accompanied by the following documents:

  (i) Self-attested copies of the orders or documents against which appeal is made;
  (ii) Copies of the documents relied upon by the appellant and referred to in the appeal; and
  (iii) An index of the documents referred to in the appeal.

 

Complaints

• If any person is unable to submit a request to a Central Public Information Officer either by reason that such an officer has not been appointed by the concerned public authority; or the Central Assistant Central Public Information Officer has refused to accept his or her application or appeal for forwarding the same to the Central Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be; or he has been refused access to any information requested by him under the RTI Act; or he has not been given a response to a request for information within the time limit specified in the Act; or he has been required to pay an amount of fee which he considers unreasonable; or he believes that he has been given incomplete, misleading or false information, he can make a complaint to the Central Information Commission.

 

Disposal of Appeals and Complaints by the CIC

• The Central Information Commission decides the appeals and complaints and conveys itsd~cision to the appellant/complainant and tirst appellate authority/CPIO. The Commission may’ decide an appeal/complaint after hearing the parties to the appealicomplaint or by inspection of documents produced by the appellant/complainant and CPIO or such senior officer of the public authority who decided the first appeal. If the Commission chooses to hear the parties before deciding the appeal or the complaint, the Commission will inform of the date of hearing to the appellant or the complainant at least seven clear days before the date of hearing. The appellant/complainant has the d:lscretion to be present in person or through his authorized representative at the time of hearing or may opt not to be present.

 

Important Web-sites

• Given below are the addresses of some important web-sites which contain substantial information relevant to the right to information:

  (i) Portal of the Government of India (http://www.indiaimage.nic.in)
  (ii) Portal on the Right to Information (http://www.rti.gov.in)
  (iii) Website of the Central Information Commission (http://www.cic.gov.in)

A circular is published by the Department of Personnel and Training No. 12/9/2009-IR, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Government of India on 24th May 2010

Sub: Implementation of CrPC Amendments 2010 i.r.o. section 41

all take a print out and send to u sp or cp .pls modifed designation and your city name and send by speed post and if reply not come pls file RTI .

 

 

To,

The .Supritendent of Police

District Akola

 

Sub: Implementation of CrPC Amendments 2010 i.r.o. section 41

 

Dear Hon’ble SUPRITENDENT OF POLICE

 

Ministry of Home Affairs has issued a notification for Amendments in the Code of Criminal Procedure effective 2nd November as per knowledge of the applicant. As advised by Hon’ble Minister of Home Affairs, a committe was set up especially to look into the provisions of section 41 (power of police to arrest without warrant).

 

NCRB and other sources have clearly revealed and it has been acknowledged by Hon’ble Supreme court, the Government and Hon’ble President of India that there is rampant misuse of the IPC section 498A which has enormous power to the police to arrest without warrant. Almost 98% of cases of IPC 498A are false. This is causing huge strain on the public exchequer due to the lost time of the police, harassment of the accused and time of the court in persuing these false cases. The general public and the courts have at several times rapped the police for abbetting such acts and misuse of power to arrest.

 

The National Police Commission in its Third Report referring to the quality of arrests by the police in India mentioned power of arrest as one of the chief sources of corruption in the police. The report suggested that, by and large, nearly 60% of the arrests were either unnecessary or unjustified and that such unjustified police action accounted for 43.2% of the expenditure of the jails.

 

 

Hon’ble Supreme Court in Joginder Singh case had established the guidelines and circular issued by the DGP to that effect but all were interpreted as per whims of the police officers making arrests.By default each and every accused in the false IPC 498A case were arrested without any application of mind or giving a thought to the age of the arrestees.In today’s India, there is no respect for elders, senior citizens and old aged parents or breast-feeded children; with one word of Daughter-in-Law, they are dragged to jail; in the name of Women empowerment. This is clearcut abuse of the law and almost all the times such wives go unpunished.

 

Hon’ble SP , as a tax-paying citizen, I would like you to respond whether these amendments in the CrPC is made aware to all the police staff and law enforcement officer’s under you? I would also like to know whether all the staff working under you are abiding to the CrPC amendments notified in November 2010. Are summons notice being issued to all the accused in such cases where the punishment is less than 7 years? Are the reasons being recorded in case of arrests or no-arrests?

 

 

Ignorantia juris non excusat or Ignorantia legis neminem excusat (Latin for “ignorance of the law does not excuse” or “ignorance of the law excuses no one”) is a legal principle holding that a person who is unaware of a law may not escape liability for violating that law merely because he or she was unaware of its content.

 

Hence for meting the ends of justice in case of genuine cases and to ensure that all criminals are brought to book, you are requested to ensure that these amendments be notified to all the staff working under you. It should not happen that because you have not followed the code the real culprits and criminals will move scot-free in the society.

 

Hon’ble Commissioner madam, having high regards for you after you have assumed the office at AKOLA and your subsequent steps in raising the morals of the police force by introducing several of innovative ideas,  I would be pleased to receive a copy of any such direction issued to your staff either by you or from the office of the DGP, Maharashtra state.

 

 

 

Thanking you,

 

Sincerely yours,

 

 

RTI TO POLICE ON FALSE 498A ARREST

Application for obtaining information under the Right to Information Act, 2005

From:
(Your Name and Adress)

To:
Public Information Officer
O/o SSP
XYZCITY

Reference : FIR No —–Dated—– at XYZ Police Station

Respected Sir,

Subject: Particulars of Information Required on Cr.No:XXYY/2009

1. Please provide me the Station Diary / Police diary and Roll Call of Cr.No: XXYY/2009 starting from dd/mm/yyy to dd/mm/yyyy and the entire case dairy details (communication docs between I.O, Inspector of Police and ACP).

2. Please supply me information on date, time & place of crime happened.

3. Please provide me I.O details, date, time & place of investigation.

4. As per the complainant statement, she left matrimonial house on —– due to harassment, please supply the address and time of the incident.

5. Please supply me Cr.No: XYZ/2009 Investigation/enquiry details (happened at crime place, ).

6. Please provide me Cr.No: XYX/2009 case certified FIR copy, documentary evidences collected & Charge Sheet.

7. Please supply me certified copies of the documentary evidences collected by the I.O before fixing my family into the case (collected from Miyapur for the allegations happened at Miyapur).

8. Please supply me certified copies of the documentary evidences collected by the I.O before fixing my family into the case (collected from Dilsuknagar for the allegations happened at Dilsuknagar).

9. Please supply me information which are the allegations happened at Dilsuknagar.

10. As per the complainant’s statement, they gave 2 plots, 11 lacks rupees cash and 40 tulas gold. Please provide those 2 plots details given and the date of transfer of property and documentary evidences collected by Investigation officer.

11. Please provide the documentary evidences or bank statements for the transaction of 11 lakhs amount.

12. Please provide documentary evidences or receipts for 40 tulas Gold and on which date they have given to accused.

13. Certified copy of complainant’s medical or hospital records showing the physical harassment.

14. Please supply me information on when Mr.FIL came to know about the incident (time, place and through which media).

15. Kindly supply information under which sections of the Cr.P.C, the investigation is carried out at Dilsukh Nagar.

16. As per Cr.P.C- 177 to 181, investigation on the crime should have happened at the crime place (in the present case crime place is Miyapur). Please provide me details whether this investigation is done as per the legal procedure.

17. Kindly provide me information under which section(s) of Cr.P.C or other supporting Act, investigation is carried out for the crime FIR. xyz/2009.

18. As per complaint, it is stated that my family members instigated me to demand dowry, does this allegation, abetting demanding dowry attracts 498-A IPC on my family members. If answer is YES, please provide the supporting reference docs for the same.

19. All the allegations reported on accused persons happened at Miyapur. For the investigation on the crime happened outside your FIR registered PS limits, needs Honorable Court cognizance under Cr.P.C (156 & 170) sections, correct me if I am wrong. Please supply me the permission received from Honorable Court by the investigation team to continue their investigation.

20. Kindly supply me information on the legal Act with section (sub-section if any) under which Saroor Nagar PS can investigate (to file charge sheet U/s-498A IPC) for the crime FIR No.xyz/2009 happened at Miyapur.

21. As per Cr.P.C-161 statements of the complainant’s mother and witnesses dowry is given at the time of marriage. Giving dowry and abetting giving dowry is also crime. Kindly supply information why police did not register the case against these persons.

22. Kindly provide me information on not collecting the neighbor’s statements at my house, Miyapur,Hyderabad.

23. Please supply me information when I.O met (date, time and place) my sister, brother, parents and relatives (accused) and informed (with which medium) about the allegations on them during the investigation.

24. Please supply me the details of people with whom I.O met during his/her investigation.

25. Please supply me information why the complainant delayed to report the crime onMay-15th 2008.

26. Please supply me the documentary evidences supporting the crime by my relatives.

27. Please send me the details (with bills) of the furniture that the complainant gave to us.

28. Please specify the duration of stay of the complainant with my family at Miyapur and also specify the address of stay.

29. Does any proof submitted to the police that show complainant lived with us.

30. Complainant’s maternity uncle Mr. BOBBA Reddy says that 1 lack rupees dowry given at the time of marriage. Her mother says 11 lacks dowry given. Which statement is considered to be true by the I.O before filing the charge sheet?

31. Does the I.O have given the opportunity to the accused to tell the facts with him/her before submitting the charge sheet in the honorable court? Please supply me the supporting evidence.

32. Please provide me why I.O not interested to collect the statements from neighbors at Miyapur.
33. Does it require collecting the statements from the neighbors at Miyapur?
34. Please supply me information on “Jurisdiction” of PS in dealing the criminal cases.
35. Does your PS have the jurisdiction to file the charge sheet?
36. Does it required to inform the accused persons about the allegations on them. If answer is yes, does it happen in this case?
37. Do you admit that I.O failed to transfer the case to the respective PS, which has jurisdiction to entertain the case?

Please provide me information on the above mentioned. For any particular item above if information is not available, kindly inform me why that particular item details were not available. If any of the above items is not understood kindly let me know, for rest of the items please send me the information.

Information required: Through Registered Post

Whether the applicant is below poverty line : No

Language demanded (U/s 6(1) of the RTI Act 2005): English

I.P.O (for Rs. 10/-) No:
In case the subject matter /any of the information is held by / related to another public authority, You are requested to transfer the application or such part of it as may be appropriate to that other Public authority with intimation to the undersigned (Section 6(3) of RTI Act).

Place:

Date: Signature

1. I have given a petition dated ——- requesting my wife to join matrimonial life, why IO did not disclosed that information in the Charge sheet or did not present it to the Honourable court.

2. Complainant and her parents very well knows about this petition for reqest to join marital life and in reply to that she denied to join marital life, but nowhere they mentioned about this in the FIR. Why the investigation officer did not disclosed this information in the charge sheet.

(This are Sample questions, you can change / add as per your situation)

RTI Seeking Employment details from Govt. Company

RTI.EPF office seeking employment detials.