The Delhi High Court affirmed that the proviso to Section 24 of the RTI Act is applicable to the CBI and serves the purpose of furnishing information concerning human rights violations and instances of corruption.
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has clarified the scope of the Central Bureau of Investigation’s (CBI) exemption under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act), stating that the agency must disclose information related to allegations of corruption and human rights violations. This ruling reaffirms the principle that transparency is paramount, even for organizations listed in the Second Schedule of the RTI Act, which are generally exempt from the Act’s provisions.
ALSO READ: Bombay High Court: Breaking Marriage Promise Due to Parental “NO” Does Not Amount to Rape
Justice Subramonium Prasad emphasized that the inclusion of CBI in the Second Schedule does not render the entire RTI Act inapplicable to the agency. He highlighted,
“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.”
This statement underscores the court’s intention to ensure that exemptions to the RTI Act do not become a shield for withholding information crucial to public interest, especially concerning corruption and human rights.
The case arose from an appeal by the CBI against a directive from the Central Information Commission (CIC), which ordered the agency to furnish details sought by IFS Officer Sanjiv Chaturvedi regarding alleged corruption in purchases at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS). The CBI’s resistance was based on its listed exemption under the RTI Act, arguing that such disclosure could compromise investigations.
However, Justice Prasad rejected this argument, noting there was no evidence to suggest that releasing information about the alleged malpractices in the purchase of cleaner disinfectants and fogging solution at AIIMS would endanger the lives of CBI officers or impede any investigation. He stated,
“The Respondent [Chaturvedi] has levelled allegations regarding corruption in purchase of cleaner disinfectants and fogging solution at JPNA Trauma Centre, AIIMS, New Delhi and this case, therefore, does not deal with any kind of sensitive investigation.”
Furthermore, the court observed that it is always within CBI’s prerogative to argue that specific information sought about an investigation is sensitive. However, in the absence of concrete evidence demonstrating the potential harm of disclosing such information, the court cannot accept blanket exemptions to transparency.
This decision marks a significant moment in the ongoing dialogue about transparency and accountability of government agencies in India. By delineating the boundaries of the CBI’s exemption under the RTI Act, the Delhi High Court has reinforced the foundational principles of the RTI Act, ensuring that exemptions do not undermine the Act’s core objective of promoting transparency and accountability in public administration.
The case also highlights the critical role of the judiciary in balancing the need for confidentiality in certain investigations with the public’s right to information, especially in matters involving allegations of corruption and human rights violations. This judgment serves as a reminder that transparency is not just a statutory requirement but a fundamental aspect of democratic governance.
CASE TITLE:
Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) Central Bureau of Investigation v Sanjeev Chaturvedi
Read Judgment:
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
