The
PIO denied the information u/s 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act claiming
disclosure would impede investigation or prosecution. The First
Appellate Authority upheld the decision of the PIO. She approached the
Commission in second Appeal. Though demand was not for copy of
charge-sheet, the appellant agreed that a copy of charge-sheet would
answer his application. Then issue before the Commission was whether
charge sheet was public document, and if so could that be shared under
RTI Act with any citizen.
CIC
Prof Sridhar Acharyulu explained: ‘The charge sheet is a report held by
the investigating officer, or public authority or court of law. As per
the RTI Act, any information held by the public authority can be
accessed by the citizen subject to the exceptions provided under Section
8. Because the charge-sheet contains the evidence which need to be
adduced in the court of law, there is a possibility of opening up many
details which could be personal or private or confidential. If the
allegation requires to be proved by call data, the charge sheet refers
to sheets of call data, which surely contain call details unrelated to
allegation. That could be private information need to be protected.
Hence each charge sheet has to be separately examined and only after
separating unnecessary and unrelated details of evidence, and only
required and permissible information out of chargesheet should be
disclosed. Thus Charge-sheet can neither be prohibited enbloc from
disclosure nor disclosed totally. Charge-sheet is a document held by
concerned authority, which has to examine disclosable aspects vis-a-vis
Section 8 and 9 of the RTI Act and then decide the case’.
As
per the Criminal Procedure, the charge-sheet is the end product of
investigation. With filing of charge-sheet, the investigation is closed
and defense that investigation might get impeded does not stand at
all. Whether revealing the information impedes apprehension or
prosecution is the next question. The Respondent authority did not even
raise this point and did nothing to explain the Commission about
possibility of impeding apprehension/prosecution by disclosure. The
Public Authority just mentioned the section number and did nothing else.
The First Appellate Authority also did not apply the mind and chose not
to give any reasons for upholding the denial by PIO. The exemption of
larger public interest provided in Section 8(1) is not available to this
clause (h). Thus it has to be decided on facts whether disclosure of
charge-sheet will really obstruct investigation, apprehension or
prosecution. The judgment of the Delhi High Court in W.P.(C)
No.3114/2007 – Shri Bhagat Singh Vs. Chief Information Commissioner & Ors on
this aspect is of relevance, since it deals with the applicability of
the Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act 2005: S Ravinder Bhat J specifically
notes, “As
held in the preceding part of the judgment, without a disclosure as to
how the investigation process would be hampered by sharing the materials
collected till the notices were issued to the assessee, the respondents
could not have rejected the request for granting information. …”
It
can be inferred that there is no specific provision anywhere
prohibiting the disclosure of charge-sheet and if there disclosure does
not affect investigation or prosecution it can be permitted under RTI,
unless there is a public interest against disclosure. The chargesheets
containing charges under Prevention of Corruption Act, especially
against public servants, need to be in public domain, in public
interest.
Citing
several decisions the CIC said: There is no specific provision under
any law which state that charge-sheet is a public document, but there
are several judgment of the Supreme court and High court which clarify
that charge sheet is a public document. Queen-Empress v. Arumugan and Ors ( (1897)
ILR 20 Mad 189) has held that any person has an interest in criminal
proceeding has a right to inspect under section 76 of the Indian
Evidence Act. In N David Vijay Kumar v The Pallavan Gram Bank, Indian Bank in
File No. CIC/SG/A/2012/000189 CIC Mr Shailesh Gandhi ordered disclosure
of Charge sheet ruling out the contention of exemption under Section
8(1)(j).
On
the perusal of the RTI application, the Commission found that the
information sought by the applicant are the part and parcel of the
information contain in the charge-sheet prepared after the completion of
the investigation under section 173 of Cr. P. C. The purpose of the
appellant will be served if the copy of the same would be provided to
the appellant. The respondent authority also agreed to provide the copy
of charge sheet.
Considering
the provisions of Cr.P.C., Evidence Act, RTI Act, erudite judicial
pronouncements, certain transparency practices in CVC, facts and
circumstances of the case and contentions raised, the Commission holds
that the charge sheet is a public document and it shall be disclosed
subject to other restrictions provided under RTI Act. There cannot be a
general hard and fast rule that every charge-sheet could be disclosed or
should not be. Each RTI request for copy of Charge-sheet required to be
examined and only permissible part should be given. The Commission,
hence, directed the respondent to examine the content of charge-sheet
and to provide appellant/… the copy of those portions of charge-sheet,
which would answer the queries raised by appellant in his RTI
application, within 3 weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
No comments:
Post a Comment