CIC Dismisses 15 RTI Complaints Against J&K Jal Shakti Department, Finds No Malafide or RTI Violations

 Indian Masterminds: Jammu: Thursday, 1^St January 2026.
All RTI Complaints Against Jal Shakti Dept Dismissed by CIC. Finds RTI Misuse, Vindicates Jal Shakti Department in JJM Row

The Jal Shakti (Public Health Engineering) Department of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir has received complete vindication from the Central Information Commission (CIC), which has dismissed all 15 Right to Information (RTI) complaints filed against it by retired IAS officer Ashok Kumar Parmar. The Commission’s ruling exposes the motivated and obstructive nature of the allegations levelled against the department and firmly upholds its conduct as lawful and transparent.
CIC Finds No Malafide Intent or Withholding of Information
In its detailed order, the Central Information Commission categorically held that there was no malafide intent, no deliberate suppression of information, and no violation of the RTI Act by the Jal Shakti Department. The Commission recorded that the department acted strictly within the framework of the law while responding to the RTI applications.
Information Already Available in Public Domain
The CIC noted that much of the information sought by Parmar was already available in the public domain through official government and departmental websites. The department had duly complied with its statutory obligations by providing the relevant web links and access details, thereby fulfilling the requirements of transparency under the RTI Act.
No Obligation to Create or Compile Data: CIC
Reaffirming settled legal principles, the Commission made it clear that a public authority is not required to create, compile, or fabricate information merely to satisfy the suspicions or narrative of an RTI applicant. Citing authoritative judgments of the Supreme Court, the CIC observed that the RTI Act is confined to the disclosure of existing records only.
The Commission underlined that the Act cannot be stretched to compel departments to generate new datasets, conduct forensic compilations, or divert administrative resources in a manner that hampers governance and public service delivery.
Ongoing House Committee Inquiry Noted
The CIC also took cognisance of the fact that a House Committee has already been constituted to verify the works executed under the Jal Jeevan Mission (JJM), and its report is still awaited. Despite this ongoing institutional scrutiny, Parmar appeared before the Committee and made sensational allegations of financial bungling amounting to Rs 6,000 crore in pipe procurement.
Official Records Contradict Inflated Allegations
Official records placed before the authorities clearly establish that the actual procurement under the Jal Jeevan Mission stands at approximately Rs 3,000 crore, effectively contradicting the exaggerated figures cited by Parmar. The Commission noted this discrepancy while assessing the credibility and intent behind the complaints.
RTI Cannot Be Used to Settle Personal Scores
The CIC further observed that the complaints were deeply intertwined with personal and service-related grievances of the complainant, which are already pending adjudication before appropriate judicial forums. The Commission reiterated in unequivocal terms that the RTI Act is not meant to be used as a tool for settling personal vendettas, pressurising departments, or conducting parallel trials through speculative and suspicion-driven queries.
Allegations Impacted Jal Jeevan Mission Progress
It is noteworthy that works under the Jal Jeevan Mission have remained stalled for nearly the last one year. The sustained campaign of allegations, inflated claims, and repeated complaints has directly undermined the pace of implementation of this flagship public welfare programme aimed at providing potable drinking water to households across Jammu and Kashmir.
No Case for Penalty; All Complaints Dismissed
After a comprehensive examination of all aspects of the matter, the Central Information Commission concluded that there was no case whatsoever for the imposition of any penalty. Accordingly, all 15 complaints were dismissed in their entirety, delivering a decisive blow to the false narrative sought to be built against the Jal Shakti Department and its officers.
The CIC’s ruling stands as a strong reaffirmation of lawful governance, responsible use of the RTI framework, and protection of public institutions from motivated and disruptive misuse of transparency laws.

India’s Data Blackout 2025: RTI Amendments, ECI and Judiciary Evading Transparency : Anjali Bhardwaj & Amrita Johri

The Wire: National: Thursday, 1^St January 2026.
As 2025 drew to a close, we witnessed how crucial legislations were brought to Parliament in complete secrecy, without any pre-legislative transparency or public consultation.

Click Here to Watch Video

From amendments to the RTI Act through the Digital Personal Data Protection Act and delays in appointment of information commissioners to questions over functioning of the Election Commission and judicial corruption, in this episode of The Wire's Jaanne Bhi Do Yaaro, Anjali Bhardwaj and Amrita Johri discuss how peoples’ right to information fared in 2025.
As 2025 drew to a close, we witnessed how crucial legislations like the Viksit Bharat-G Ram G Act to replace MGNREGA and the SHANTI Act to allow private companies in the nuclear sector were brought to Parliament in complete secrecy, without any pre-legislative transparency or public consultation. These laws which will have grave implications on peoples’ lives across the country were passed at lightening speed.
In December, after repeated orders of the Supreme Court, the government finally appointed the Chief and eight Information Commissioners to the Central Information Commission. The CIC which had been functioning with just two information commissioners saw its backlog rise significantly leading to people having to wait for years to have their appeals/complaints heard.
The CIC will finally function at full strength after a period of nearly nine years – after December 2016. The condition is several state information commissions continues to be dire; the Jharkhand information commission remains defunct since 2020. We discuss the key findings of the report card of Information Commissions by Satark Nagrik Sangathan which shows how governments are systematically undermining the RTI Act by keeping posts of information commissioners vacant.
In November 2025, the government operationalised several provisions of the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act including Section 44(3) – which amends and fundamentally weakens the RTI Act. The amendment made to section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act seeks to exempt all personal information from disclosure and could block access to critical information needed for seeking accountability (eg. names of contractors or wilful loan defaulters). The amendment does away with the exceptions carved out within Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act wherein personal information could be denied only if it had no relationship to any public activity or public interest; or would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy.
In fact, in August 2025, even before the Data Protection Act was notified, it was invoked by the Delhi high court to deny information related to PM Modi’s degree which led to many questioning if this was why the RTI law was amended.
In 2025, in a series of press conferences, Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi alleged large-scale “vote chori” in elections, accusing the Election Commission of enabling voter fraud by allowing inflated, duplicate, bogus entries and targeted deletions in electoral rolls. The Election Commission’s response ranged from rejecting the contentions as baseless to demanding that the allegations be submitted on affidavit.
In the video, we discuss whether the ECI is evading accountability by withholding crucial information and its impact on public trust. The ECI has refused to publicly disclose searchable voter lists and CCTV footage from polling stations, which are essential for verifying irregularities, claiming that these will undermine the privacy of voters. In December 2024, the Election Commission and the Union government brought an amendment to Rule 93(2) of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, to restrict public access to election-related records.
In 2025, the ECI initiated a nationwide Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls across the country – requiring all 100 crore voters to undergo a verification, including furnishing documents regarding their identity, age and citizenship. We discuss how the decision to carry out the SIR was taken in complete secrecy, with no prior public information or consultation with people or political parties. Crucial documents which justify this mammoth verification of voter lists, are not being made public by the ECI.
The year started with the viral video of money burning at the residence of Justice Verma – a judge of the Delhi high court. It brought issues of judicial transparency and accountability in the national spotlight. The Supreme Court mandated that all judges place their asset declarations on the court’s website. We discuss the need for transparency to address corruption in the judiciary.
In 2025, the phenomenon of “No Data Available” continued unabated. From crucial information about the air quality in the country to GDP calculations – on several critical issues, either the government evaded accountability by claiming data was not available or there were serious questions about the quality of data put out by the government.
(This article went live on December thirty-first, two thousand twenty five, at forty-five minutes past five in the evening.)

CS directs speedy recovery of RTI penalties from SPIOs

Tribune India: Chandigarh: Thursday, 1^St January 2026.

Haryana Chief Secretary Anurag Rastogi has directed all administrative secretaries to ensure speedy recovery of penalties imposed on State Public Information Officers (SPIOs) under Section 20(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Chairing a review meeting here on Tuesday, the Chief Secretary instructed that the penalties be recovered in monthly instalments directly from the SPIOs concerned.
Rastogi emphasised that strict compliance with the provisions of the RTI Act was essential to ensure transparency and accountability in governance. He reiterated that timely disposal of RTI applications and adherence to statutory timelines was a collective responsibility of all departments to uphold the spirit of the Act and strengthen public trust in the administration.

Over 12,900 govt employees took Ladki Bahin benefits despite exclusion norms : Written by Vallabh Ozarkar, Information accessed under RTI reveals that over 12,900 government employees received funds as beneficiaries.

The Indian Express: Mumbai: Wednesday, 31 December 2025.
With this latest figure, the total number of ineligible beneficiaries under the scheme has now crossed one lakh.

Currently, nearly 2.4 crore women receive benefits under
the Ladki Bahin Yojana. (File Photo)

In A glaring oversight of funds under Ladki Bahin Yojana being availed by ineligible beneficiaries across the state, fresh information accessed under RTI reveals that over 12,900 government employees received funds as beneficiaries of the scheme that explicitly excluded salaried government staff. The RTI further reveals that the Women and Child Development Department has also directed officials of concerned departments to initiate action against such employees.
According to the latest information accessed under the Right to Information Act by The Indian Express, the Women and Child Development Department has admitted that 12,915 government employees received the monthly Rs 1,500 assistance under the scheme. The current numbers show a significant jump in such beneficiaries as earlier. WCD minister Aditi Tatkare had said that there were nearly 2,400 government employees who had wrongly availed benefits.
The WCD department, in the RTI response said, “Instructions have been issued to concerned offices to initiate action against such employees for wrongfully availing benefits.”
With this latest figure, the total number of ineligible beneficiaries under the scheme has now crossed one lakh.
The disclosure builds on an earlier RTI report published by The Indian Express in October, which had revealed that 12,431 men and 77,980 ineligible women (aggregating to over 90,000 illegal beneficiaries) had received benefits under the scheme, resulting in wrongful disbursal of at least Rs 164.52 crore.
However, the latest RTI reply received on December 16 this year reveals that the figure is substantially higher and has increased three-fold to 12,915, pointing to deeper verification failures in the implementation of the flagship welfare programme.
The WCD Department has acknowledged that benefits taken by government employees were irregular and has formally communicated with relevant departments regarding possible recovery and disciplinary action. The department, however, did not provide details on recovery proceedings with regards to previous instances of ineligible women beneficiaries.
The RTI reply also reiterates that men were paid benefits from July 2024 to July 2025, after which payments were stopped. Similarly, government employees continued to receive benefits until they were identified during subsequent verification exercises.
The scheme, launched in June 2024, provides Rs 1,500 per month to women aged 21–65 years from families earning less than Rs 2.5 lakh annually. It was rolled out months ahead of the Assembly elections and drew criticism from the Opposition, which labelled it a pre-election populist measure.
Despite admitting largescale inclusion errors, the WCD Department has said that reason-wise, department-wise or district-wise compiled data on ineligible beneficiaries and recoveries is not available. Eligibility and disqualification decisions were taken based on government resolutions issued on June 28, September 3 and September 12, 2024, it said.
In the October RTI response, the department had admitted that no recovery process had been initiated at that stage, even as verification had uncovered misrepresentation of income, multiple beneficiaries within households, and government employees claiming benefits despite being ineligible.
Verification still underway
On August 25, Women and Child Development Minister Aditi Tatkare had stated on X that preliminary data suggested nearly 26 lakh beneficiaries may not meet eligibility criteria, following which district-level physical verification was initiated. Disbursal to 26.34 lakh suspect accounts was later suspended pending verification.
Officials had then described the irregularities as “the tip of the iceberg,” warning that numbers could rise further as scrutiny continued.
A statewide e-KYC verification drive has since been launched to prevent further misuse.
The state government has made the e-KYC process mandatory for eligible women under this scheme, with a deadline set for December 31.
Currently, nearly 2.4 crore women receive benefits under the Ladki Bahin Yojana, costing the state exchequer nearly Rs 3,700 crore per month.
The state government has made a budgetary allocation of Rs 36,000 crore for the scheme.

RTI Reply Sparks Row as Delhi Transport Corporation Issues Bizarre Response on Free Bus Rides for Women

illustrated Daily: New Delhi: Wednesday, 31 December 2025.

An RTI query seeking routine details on women’s free travel scheme under the Government of NCT of Delhi draws an irrelevant reply, raising questions over transparency and accountability.
Whether it is the Government of India or a State Government, the Right to Information Act (RTI) often becomes a major headache for the administration whenever citizens seek information that the authorities find difficult to disclose publicly.

A similar case has surfaced in the final month of 2025 involving the Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC), which functions under the Government of NCT of Delhi.
In this case, an RTI applicant had sought simple and routine information related to the free travel facility being provided to women in DTC buses. However, instead of furnishing the required details, DTC issued a strange and irrelevant reply, clearly reflecting the Transport Department’s casual and irresponsible attitude towards RTI, which is a constitutionally guaranteed mechanism for transparency.
The letter sent by DTC through Speed Post is being reproduced here verbatim so that the public can see for themselves the deliberate negligence shown by the department.
Interestingly, the RTI application did not even ask for proof of DTC’s negligence. Yet, without being asked, DTC ended up supplying evidence of its own negligence in its reply.
It is now quite natural that the matter may proceed to the First Appeal and thereafter to the Second Appeal under the RTI Act. If that happens, the outcome of the appeal proceedings will be worth watching.

Has your medicine maker been inspected? Can’t tell you, say drug regulators, CDSCO claimed that the information was exempt under the RTI Act.

The Times of India: National: Wednesday, 31 December 2025.
Inspection of drug manufacturing sites in India is confidential information that is exempt from public disclosure under the Right to Information according to the drug regulatory authorities. Though the Central Drug Standards Control Organisation (CDSCO) is supposed to have started risk-based inspection of drug-making facilities since December 2022, when asked how many such inspections have been conducted each month since then the CDSCO claimed that the information was exempt under the RTI Act. However, retired and active drug controllers pointed out that there was no blanket exemption on this information.

“The public has the right to seek information on how many inspections have been conducted each year along with the dates of the inspections, the name of company and the names of the drug inspectors who conducted the inspection. Drug inspectors are public functionaries paid with public money to ensure safety of drugs in public interest. Why shouldn’t this information be available in the public domain, on the website of every state drug controller?” asked Dr KV Babu, ophthalmologist and RTI activist, who sought the information.
Section 8(1) (d) cited by most drug authorities to deny information “exempts information the disclosure of which would prejudice the commercial interests of a third party, unless the public interest in disclosure is served”. The law clearly states that public interest overrides commercial interests.
Section 8(1) (h) exempts “information that would impede the investigation or prosecution of offenders”. “This would only apply to those inspections which resulted in cases being filed as the drug authorities can claim that revealing the inspection reports could affect the case in court. But barring those inspection reports, the details of all other inspections can be made public. However, since there is no rule mandating the disclosure, the default mode is to not reveal it,” said an assistant drug controller who did not want to be named.
Section (g) protects “information that would endanger life or physical safety, or identify sources of information for law enforcement”. “How does revealing this apply to information regarding inspection of drug-making facilities? If anything, not revealing it is endangering the life of the public who consume the medicines,” said Dr Babu.
CDSCO’s drug alert list released every month shows that there are companies whose products are repeatedly found to be substandard with serious failings such as the presence of bacterial endotoxins and sterility issues in Ringer Lactate intravenous fluids. The products of one such company, Paschim Banga Pharmaceuticals, killed six new mothers in Karnataka, after which it was shut down. However, the Ringer Lactate fluid produced by this company was found contaminated with bacterial endotoxins in April 2020, again in August 2023, October 2024 and in November 2024 before it was connected to the deaths in Karnataka. Samples tested in December 2024 and those tested in January and February 2025 were also found similarly contaminated. However, with no data on inspections in the public domain, there is no way of knowing if drug control authorities ever inspected this unit before the deaths occurred or when they last inspected it or what they found if they did.
Similarly, samples of yet another manufacturer of Ringer Lactate fluid, Swaroop Pharmaceuticals in Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh being sold in Odisha were found to be contaminated with bacterial endotoxins in July, August, September, October and December 2022. In January 2023, samples of the product lifted in Mizoram, in February in Odisha and again in December 2023 were found to be similarly contaminated. Yet there is no information in the public domain on whether inspections were conducted of the manufacturing facility of this company and what was found to be the reason for the repeated contamination. There is no information regarding any risk-based inspection of manufacturers of Ringer lactate fluid following the deaths in Karnataka.
“Earlier, every unit had to be inspected once a year by state drug inspectors and every two years the licence had to be renewed after the unit was inspected to see if they are fit for renewal. This was diluted in the name of ‘ease of business’ and now inspections need to be done only once every three years. Framing of regulations ought to be patient/consumer centric and not to suit the business,” said Ravi Uday Bhaskar Director-General of All India Drug Controller Officers Confederation.
Incidentally, there is no prioritization of inspection of manufacturing sites, from where drugs originate. Most of the drug regulation is in the form of lifting samples from an estimated 1.7 lakh pharmacies, stockists, distributors etc scattered across the country and getting them tested. In contrast there are less than 8,000 manufacturing units according to the 2023 report of the government’s survey of pharma clusters. According to the survey, there are 118 pharma clusters in India and 7,673 pharma manufacturing units.
Though the government announced risk-based inspections, the rules do not specify any criteria, parameters or methodology to determine what constitutes a “risk-based” inspection or how manufacturers are to be categorized by risk level, making it open ended and discretionary. “This results in inconsistent interpretation across states and in practice, a reduction in inspection frequency and oversight, thereby diluting regulatory control over manufacturing compliance,” said Uday Bhaskar.
RTIs queries to 16 zonal offices and the CDSCO on inspections have been stonewalled repeatedly.

Reality check for Mumbai civic polls: In 3 years, 99% of development funds went to wards under ruling alliance : Written by Vallabh Ozarkar

The Indian Express: Article: Wednesday, 31 December 2025.

As Mumbai heads towards civic elections on January 15, the dice has already been loaded in favour of the BJP-led Mahayuti alliance to replicate its dominating performance in local body polls across the rest of Maharashtra.
Over the past three years, more than 99 per cent of funds allotted by the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) for development work went to wards in constituencies represented by Mahayuti lawmakers, an investigation by The Indian Express of records obtained under the Right to Information (RTI) Act has found.
The records show that between February 2023 and October 2025, more than Rs 1,490.66 crore was sanctioned by the BMC for civic development, such as road repairs, drainage upgrades, health facilities and neighbourhood beautification.
Of this, Rs 1,476.92 crore went to areas under MLAs, MLCs and MPs from the ruling alliance of BJP, Ajit Pawar-led NCP and Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena, the records show. BJP lawmakers got the lion’s share (Rs 1076.7 crore), followed by those from Shinde’s Sena (Rs 372.7 crore).
In sharp contrast (see charts), only Rs 13.74 crore, or 0.9 per cent, was granted to the Opposition during this period and that too to one legislator from the Congress, Amin Patel, who represents Mumbadevi, a constituency in South Mumbai with a sizable population of minorities. Of the rest, all the ten MLAs from the Shiv Sena (UBT), two others from the Congress and one from SP received no funds at all.
This imbalance is the continuation of a pattern first reported by The Indian Express in  January 2024, when RTI data revealed that the entire  Rs 500 crore disbursed in the initial phase of the temporary policy had gone exclusively to ruling-party MLAs.
These findings raise questions about fair governance in India’s richest municipal corporation with an annual budget of over Rs 74,000 crore, particularly with the BMC elections just days away. Urban policy experts point out that infrastructure is a key ingredient in pre-poll political messaging with upgraded public spaces reinforcing the visibility and electoral advantage of ruling-party legislators.
Between February 2023 and November 2024, the Mahayuti had 21 MLAs from Mumbai while the Opposition Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) had 15 MLAs. After the Assembly elections in November 2024, the Mahayuti wrested one more seat from the Opposition. The MVA enjoys the upper hand when it comes to parliamentarians with four out of six MPs.
Consider this:
l in the current fiscal year, Rs 360 crore has been disbursed so far all of it to ruling legislators.
l  Among MLAs, Ram Kadam of Ghatkopar West (BJP) emerged as the top recipient with Rs 70 crore in civic funds: Rs 35 crore (FY 2023-24), Rs 17.5 crore (FY 2024-25), Rs 17.5 crore (FY 2025–26). The next in line was BJP’s Yogesh Sagar (Charkop) with Rs 67.47 crore followed by party colleague Atul Bhatkhalkar (Kandivali East) with Rs 66.06 crore.

The timing of allocations further sharpens concerns.
In the months preceding the 2024 Lok Sabha and Assembly elections, RTI records show that over Rs 467 crore was released to ruling-party incumbents even as almost all Opposition legislators received no funds.
l  Between August and September 2024, weeks before the code of conduct was imposed on October 15, 23 ruling alliance BJP and Shiv Sena (Shinde) MLAs received a total of Rs 357.3 crore in civic funds. The only Opposition MLA to receive a token allocation was once again Amin Patel of the Congress with Rs 3.92 crore.
l  The total amount also includes funds granted to MLCs from Mumbai who do not represent any constituency. Even in this group, records show, none of the five MLCs from the Opposition were allotted funds at least two of them, Shiv Sena (UBT)’s Sachin Ahir and NCP (SP)’s Sunil Shinde, told this newspaper that they had sought funding for civic development but their requests were ignored. BJP’s Pravin Darekar topped this list with Rs 33 crore: Rs 17.5 crore each in FY 2024-25 and FY 2025-26.
‘Waiting for basic services’
At the heart of the imbalance in fund allocation is a policy introduced in February 2023, after the BMC’s elected body of corporators was dissolved at the end of its term in March 2022 and placed under a state-appointed administrator. In the absence of elected corporators, MLAs and MPs were authorised to propose development works for the 227 wards — a temporary administrative measure intended to prevent civic paralysis.
In practice, however, the policy concentrated the powers to grant funds, based on demands raised by the legislators and parliamentarians, in the hands of Mumbai’s Guardian Ministers: Shiv Sena’s Deepak Kesarkar (City) and BJP’s Mangal Prabhat Lodha (Suburban) from 2023-24; and, Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde (City) and BJP’s Ashish Shelar (Suburban) from January this year.

When contacted by The Indian Express, Shelar said, “All fund allocations have been carried out strictly in accordance with BMC norms, and there is no question of any bias.” Shinde or his representatives did not respond to requests for comment.
“The MLAs and MPs write to the Guardian Ministers and the administrator, who is the BMC Commissioner, to avail the funds. Based on these proposals, the Guardian Ministers approve the funds, which are then processed by the BMC,” a senior BMC official said. BMC Commissioner Bhushan Gagrani declined comment citing the model code of conduct in place for the January 15 polls.
Several Opposition legislators told this newspaper (see adjacent story) that civic work was “not just about politics”. Behind every pending proposal, they say, there are “thousands of people waiting for basic services”, such as broken toilets in slum pockets, clogged drains and unusable roads.
Ruling-party leaders attribute the imbalance to “incomplete proposals” from Opposition legislators. However, Opposition MLAs counter that proposals were repeatedly submitted and stalled at the approval stage.
“Development visibility is narrative control. Where money flows determines who owns the political narrative before elections. Repaired roads, parks and street lighting are tangible demonstrations of governance and development work that ruling legislators can showcase to voters,” said Mrudul Nile, a public policy expert and professor at Mumbai University.
According to BMC officials, various departments of the civic body continue to carry out basic maintenance work across all areas of the city, covering basic facilities and services such as water supply and solid waste management.
They said the civic funds allotted on demands from MLAs and MPs (and earlier by corporators) cover the upgrade of amenities, such as repairs of footpaths, roads and drains; cemeteries, libraries and gardens; development of garbage disposal areas; construction and repair of community toilets; and beautification projects.

RTI Reveals 23 Banks Have Implemented Mulehunter.AI, But Total Mule Accounts Identified Still Not Disclosed : Prabhanu Kumar Das

Media Nama: National: Wednesday, 31 December 2025.

As of December 10, 2025, 23 banks have implemented the Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) MuleHunter.AI initiative, according to an RTI response that MediaNama received from the central bank.
Furthermore, India’s central bank said that it cannot provide data on the number of mule accounts identified or acted upon through MuleHunter.AI because the RBI holds the information in a fiduciary capacity with banks, and that disclosure could harm competitive interests under the RTI Act, 2005.
Moreover, the RBI stated that it does not have information on formal coordination with law enforcement agencies like the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) specifically for MuleHunter.AI, nor does it hold details of internal circulars, guidelines, or advisories sent to banks or payment aggregators about the initiative.
For context, MuleHunter.AI is an artificial intelligence-driven (AI-driven) model developed by the Reserve Bank Innovation Hub (RBIH) to help banks detect and curb mule accounts, which fraudsters use to funnel, launder, or transfer proceeds of financial fraud.
Earlier in August 2025, the RBI’s Chief General Manager (CGM) Suvendu Pati said that at least 15 banks had already implemented MuleHunter.AI. These banks include the likes of Canara Bank, Punjab National Bank, Bank of India, Bank of Baroda, and AU Small Finance Bank. At the same event, Pati added that Federal Bank was in advanced stages of going live.
Meanwhile, RBI Governor Sanjay Malhotra noted in November 2025 that nearly 20 banks had adopted the system, again without a published list of names.
What is Mule Hunter?
The RBIH announced MuleHunter.AI in December 2024 as a new AI-based tool focused on identifying mule accounts used in financial fraud. Fraudsters exploit mule accounts to transfer illicit funds through otherwise legitimate banking systems, which makes transactions difficult to trace and recover, and leaves financial institutions as well as customers vulnerable to losses.
Traditional fraud detection systems rely on static, rule-based models that flag accounts based on fixed criteria. However, these systems often generate high false positives and require lengthy manual checks, slowing responses and leaving many fraudulent accounts undetected for longer periods. Moreover, rigid rule sets cannot adapt swiftly to evolving criminal behaviour.
However, MuleHunter.AI analyses transaction and account activity patterns across banks to identify accounts likely used as “mules” in financial fraud, rather than relying on fixed, static rules. It was developed by studying 19 distinct behaviours associated with mule accounts, enabling more accurate and faster detection of suspicious accounts.
AI In Fintech and Banking
AI is increasingly shaping the Indian financial sector, with fraud detection emerging as a primary application alongside customer service and risk management. At MediaNama’s “AI in Fintech” panel in April 2025, industry experts highlighted that banks and fintech firms are experimenting with AI to detect fraud and unusual patterns in transactional behaviour, much like the RBI’s MuleHunter.AI initiative that flags mule accounts involved in financial crime.
Beyond fraud detection, AI supports fintech operations in several other areas. For example, platforms are using algorithms and analysing behavioural and demographic data in order to personalise investment recommendations and tailor customer interactions. However, panellists at MediaNama’s event noted that AI deployment remains limited in critical decisions such as credit scoring and lending, largely due to concerns over historical bias in datasets.
Furthermore, the RBI’s Deputy Governor M. Rajeshwar Rao has also emphasised the need for responsible AI adoption across the banking sector, warning of risks such as algorithmic bias, opaque models, and systemic vulnerabilities in September 2025.
Additionally, the RBI has articulated a broader governance regime for AI through its Framework for Responsible and Ethical Enablement of Artificial Intelligence (FREE-AI). To explain, the FREE-AI framework sets out foundational principles and practical recommendations that aim to guide how banks, fintechs and regulated entities build, deploy and govern AI systems responsibly.

CIC dismisses RTI complaints filed by retired IAS officer

 Daily Excelsior: Jammu: Wednesday, 31 December 2025.

The Jal Shakti (PHE) Department, Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir, has been unequivocally vindicated by the Central Information Commission (CIC), which has dismissed all 15 RTI complaints filed by Ashok Kumar Parmar (IAS retired), exposing the motivated and obstructive nature of the allegations levelled against the department.
The CIC categorically upheld the departmental position and recorded that there was no malafide intent, no deliberate withholding of information, and no violation of the RTI Act by the Jal Shakti Department.
The Commission clearly noted that the information sought by Parmar was already available in the public domain on official Government and departmental websites and that the department had fully complied with the law by providing the relevant web links.
The CIC further reaffirmed the settled legal position that it is not the duty of any public authority to create, compile, or fabricate data merely to suit the narrative or suspicions of an applicant. Relying on authoritative Supreme Court judgments, the Commission held, “the RTI Act is confined strictly to disclosure of existing records and cannot be stretched to force departments into generating new datasets or forensic compilations at the cost of governance and public service delivery”.
It is pertinent to highlight that a House Committee has already been constituted to verify the works executed under the Jal Jeevan Mission (JJM) and the Committee’s report is still awaited. Notwithstanding this ongoing institutional scrutiny, Parmar chose to appear before the Committee and made sensational allegations of bungling to the tune of Rs 6,000 crore in pipe procurement, whereas official records establish that the actual procurement is approximately Rs 3,000 crore.
The CIC also took note of the fact that the complaints were deeply entangled with personal and service-related grievances of the complainant, which are already pending before appropriate judicial forums. The Commission reiterated in clear terms that the RTI Act is not a weapon for settling personal scores, pressurising departments, or running parallel trials through insinuations and suspicion-driven queries.
It is not out of place to mention that works under the Jal Jeevan Mission have remained halted for nearly last one year, and the sustained campaign of allegations, inflated figures, and motivated complaints have directly undermined the pace of implementation of this flagship public welfare programme meant to provide potable drinking water to households.
After comprehensive examination, the CIC concluded that there was no case whatsoever for imposition of penalty, and accordingly all complaints were dismissed in entirety, delivering a decisive blow to the false narrative sought to be built against the Jal Shakti Department and its officers.

Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act: Cloaking India’s right to know in secrecy : Shivam Jadaun

Bar and Bench: Column: Wednesday, 31 December 2025.
Ironically, citizen data rights under the DPDP Act are delayed till May 2027, but the RTI dilution is immediate.

When a farmer in rural Maharashtra used the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI), to expose embezzled wages under the MGNREGA scheme, it showed how an ordinary citizen can hold the powerful accountable.
Over the years, RTI has been the support system of democratic transparency in India. This framework has assisted in unravelling the Commonwealth Games scam, the Adarsh Housing Society scandal and the Vyapam scam, among others. Furthermore, it has enabled the citizens, journalists and activists to question the authorities and demand transparency from them.
However, a single clause in the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDP Act) - Section 44(3) - can reverse decades of advancement in the regime of RTI. By amending Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act and removing the “public interest exception” for disclosing personal information, the law risks pushing governance back into secrecy. It is crucial to know why this amendment raises big issues and why its repeal is necessary.
The breach of a subtle balance
The RTI Act was designed to balance both transparency and privacy. Section 8(1)(j) initially created an exception on the disclosure of personal information. It protected data that was not connected with any public activity or interest or whose disclosure would have caused an unwarranted invasion of an individual’s privacy, unless a larger public interest justified its release. This made data such as the declaration of assets by officials or information on government contracts available when they were held to account. The courts have consistently upheld this balance in many landmark cases.
In Surupsingh Hrya Naik v. State of Maharashtra (2007) and Vijay Prakash v. Union of India (2009), the Bombay High Court and the Delhi High Court, respectively, ruled that privacy is subject to surrender in the face of the common interest when the need arises. Even in Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. Central Information Commissioner (2012), the Supreme Court held that personal information is exempt from disclosure unless a larger public interest is established.
Moreover, the Supreme Court in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Raj Narain (1975) has already recognised the right to information as a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution even before the enactment of RTI Act, 2005. The Court held that the citizens have the right to know how the government functions. Similarly, in SP Gupta v. Union of India (1981), it restated that the right to information is a fundamental aspect of the freedom of speech and expression.
Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act reverses this framework. It has replaced Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act with a sweeping clause: “Information that is related to personal information”. The link to the public activity and the public interest test has disappeared; public information officers have no discretion in complicated cases. The amorphous definition of “personal information” is open to abuse and would promote a risk-averse attitude, leading to inconsistent, arbitrary denials across departments. RTI requests seeking disbursal matters concerning subsidies or tenders could be refused by the public authorities, as such information is considered personal even though it concerns public funds or governance.
Additionally, under Section 4(1)(a) of the RTI Act, public authorities are required to properly maintain and digitise their records. Section 4(1)(b) obligates them to proactively place this information in the public domain. Meanwhile, Section 8 provides a few exceptions from disclosure of information. Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act undermines this structure by giving the authorities the option to withhold the disclosure of information by branding it as such, even when the purpose and accountability of the disclosed information is meant to benefit the populace.
Take an example of a citizen who wants to obtain information about the beneficiaries of a welfare scheme to expose mismanagement. According to the revised law, the authorities have a chance to refuse it under the justification of the data being personal, irrespective of whether it has public significance or not. This change poses a threat of making the DPDP Act a pretext for opacity, which defeats the essence of the RTI Act.
A convenient defence, a deeper problem
The government has defended Section 44(3) by referring to Section 3(c) of the DPDP Act, which provides an exception to information or data which is publicly available and which must be disclosed under law. This defence is incorrectly positioned and signals a greater shift towards secrecy through regulation. The previous push for transparency has now been superseded by administrative secrecy.
Section 3 of the DPDP Act is not much of a relief when the RTI Act itself has been restricted via amendments that restrict disclosure of information. The outcome is a system that makes it possible to make blanket refusals or denials to citizens, leaving them with fewer instruments of ensuring transparency. While RTI Section 8(2) still allows disclosure in the larger public interest, the absence of a definition of “personal information” now allows authorities to classify almost any record as personal. This makes the safeguard practically ineffective in real-world decision-making.
To aggravate this issue, the RTI Act lacks a definition of what constitutes “personal information”, whereas Section 2(t) of the DPDP Act defines “personal data” as any data relating to an individual who can be identified by or through such data. This broad definition allows any authority to consider almost any record personal - including a list of subsidies, welfare recipients or official contracts - making it easier and more arbitrary to refuse under Section 44(3).
Privacy and transparency: Complementary rights
The privacy-transparency conflict is not a zero-sum game. They are both established under Part III of the Constitution as affirmed in KS Puttaswamy (I) v. Union of India (2017), where the Supreme Court ruled that any restriction must meet the tests of legality, necessity and proportionality. This principle was represented in the original Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act that permitted disclosure where the interests of the public overrode privacy. Section 44(3) abandons this balance and establishes an absolute exemption, disregarding context.
Previously, the Central Information Commission has made it clear in S Muthumalai v. CPIO (2020) that Section 8(1)(j) can be invoked only when the information sought is personal information of a third party, has no relationship to any public activity or interest, and its disclosure would cause an unwarranted invasion of privacy. Section 44(3) has now negated this jurisprudence and may lead to inconsistency in its application across different departments.
The amendment also fails the proportionality test of the Supreme Court provided in the case of Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020), which necessitates a restriction of fundamental rights to be necessary, proportionate and least restrictive. Section 44(3), which has introduced a blanket exemption of all personal information irrespective of public interest, fails to respond to these standards.
This moves in a direction opposite to the expert guidance available on the issue. The Justice AP Shah Committee (2012) made it clear that a privacy law should not water down the RTI Act and that information which the RTI requires to be disclosed cannot be treated as a breach of privacy. Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act disregards these suggestions and turns the DPDP Act into an instrument of secrecy, reminiscent of the colonial era legislation.
Broader implications for governance and democracy
Through this amendment to the RTI framework, people from marginalised and economically weaker backgrounds who rely heavily on welfare schemes, subsidies and essential government services will be disproportionately affected. Ironically, citizen data rights under the DPDP Act are delayed till May 2027, but the RTI dilution is immediate. Moreover, the RTI applications of hundreds of disadvantaged citizens every month could be refused now due to the reasons of personal data. It would be much harder to perform social audits, investigative journalism and anti-corruption activities. Voter lists, land records and other important databases can also be closed to the public, undermining transparency and citizen control. The consequences will be far-reaching.
Besides, the amendment weakens the democratic fabric in India, considering the fact that the RTI Act gives citizens the right to question authority and holds people accountable in a system that is usually tainted with secrecy. Section 44(3) DPDP Act suppresses civic action, which is the foundation of reform, by undermining this right. It is also a disturbing precedent, since it weaponises the notion of privacy to ward off societal questioning.
Conclusion: The way forward
The RTI Act is not a bureaucratic inconvenience; it’s a constitutional commitment to transparency. To balance between privacy and accountability, it is necessary to restore the original Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. A broader analysis of the DPDP Act is also needed to ascertain that it is in line with democracy.
The repeal of Section 44(3) is not merely a legislative correction; it is a democratic imperative. India needs a system where transparency is not sacrificed at the altar of abstract notions of privacy. The RTI Act has been a source of accountability in the last twenty years, but Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act is extinguishing that light. The only solution is to repeal it in order to secure the right to know.
Now that Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act has been brought into force (operationalised via Gazette Notification on November 13, 2025), and public authorities must apply the DPDP Act’s definition of personal data while deciding RTI requests, the risk of opacity has already materialised. It is imperative to reassess the amendment so that the constitutional promise of transparency is not eroded.
(Shivam Jadaun is a Delhi-based lawyer and tech consultant specialising in technology policy.)

State CIC pulls up MahaRail for ignoring RTI query of ex-min

Times of India: Nagpur: Tuesday, 30 December 2025.
The State Chief Information Commissioner, Rahul Pande, has come down heavily on MahaRail (Maharashtra Rail Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd) for failing to respond to a Right to Information (RTI) application filed by former MLA and minister of state, Avinash Warjukar, terming the lapse a serious violation of the RTI Act, 2005. The Commission observed that MahaRail lacked a clear, accountable and effective mechanism for dealing with RTI applications.

Warjukar had sought information on 12 points through RTI applications dated February 15, 2024, and January 23, 2025. The queries pertained to the establishment of MahaRail, appointment of its managing director, technical and administrative approvals for sanctioned works, and details of development projects undertaken by the corporation.
As no information was provided within the stipulated period, Warjukar filed first appeal on February 25, 2025. When no hearing was conducted, he approached the Commission with a second appeal on April 11, 2025.
The appellant alleged that during a personal follow-up, MahaRail officials informed him that the RTI Act was not applicable to the corporation. Though MahaRail later communicated that a report would be submitted, no such report was placed on record.
The matter came up for hearing of the second appeal on October 14, 2025. Warjukar was personally present, along with the current Public Information Officer (PIO) and assistant manager (Public Relations) Vineet Toke, and the current First Appellate Authority (FAA) and manager (legal) Abhivrat Das. During the hearing, MahaRail officials sought additional time to submit clarifications in response to a hearing notice issued on September 5, 2025.
During the hearing, the current FAA clarified that the RTI Act applies to MahaRail and is being followed, expressing regret if any official had conveyed otherwise. The Commission found that much of the information was either absent or only partially available on the MahaRail website. It also noted that the earlier PIO and FAA were contractual employees who had since left service, creating ambiguity over accountability.
Considering these factors, the Commission partially allowed the second appeal and directed MahaRail to provide all available information on points 1 to 12 free of cost within two weeks, in line with Section 7(6) of the RTI Act. It also directed the submission of photocopies of the RTI application register and responses to the secretary of the Information Commission.
The CIC further directed the additional chief secretary, general administration department, to issue guidelines for appointing competent, full-time RTI staff in such authorities, and asked the current director of MahaRail to initiate appropriate administrative action over the lapses.

Delhi Medical colleges fail to submit Action taken reports for Nasha mukt abhiyaan: RTI reveals compliance gap

 Medical Dialogues: New Delhi: Tuesday, 30 December 2025.
In a shocking revelation, information obtained through the Right to Information application has revealed that none of the 10 medical colleges in Delhi have submitted the mandatory action-taken (ATRs) reports under the Nasha Mukt Abhiyan. Across the country, only 49 medical institutes have filed the compliance report.

The Union Ministries of Social Justice & Empowerment and Education launched the Nasha Mukt Abhiyan programme in August 2024. It requires medical colleges to set up Nasha Mukt Hostel Committees, conduct counselling and awareness programmes, identify at-risk students, monitor hostels for early signs of substance use etc. The medical colleges are required to submit quarterly reports to the regulator.
Medical Dialogues had earlier reported that last year, the Secretaries in the Department of Social Justice & Empowerment and the Department of Higher Education, GoI, had requested the NMC chairman for the implementation of Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan (Drug-Free India Campaign) in the Medical Colleges.
Accordingly, to combat the menace of drug abuse, last year, NMC had informed its decision to implement the Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan (Drug-Free India Campaign) in all the medical colleges across India. Additionally, NMC had also decided to constitute a drug-free hostel committee in all colleges/institutions.
Earlier this year also, the National Medical Commission (NMC) asked the medical colleges under its purview to submit an action taken report regarding the implementation of the measures on "Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan", launched by the Department of Social Justice & Empowerment. NMC had asked the medical colleges to provide the requisite ATR directly to the Department of Social Justice & Empowerment, along with a copy of Higher Education Department.
As per the latest media report by the Times of India, information obtained through the RTI application revealed that none of the premier medical institutes in Delhi- including All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, VMMC, Lady Hardinge Medical College (LHMC), Maulana Azad Medical College (MAMC), UCMS, BSA Medical College, NDMC Medical College, Army College of Medical Sciences and Jamia Hamdard- have submitted the required ATRs under the Nasha Mukt Abhiyan.
Meanwhile, in response to the RTI findings, the National Medical Commission (NMC) said that the figures cited required verification. As per the TOI report, the NMC said, "The claim that 49 medical colleges have submitted ATRs while none of Delhi’s 10 colleges have done so is not available with the NMC at this stage and requires verification, given there are nearly 800 medical colleges in the country."
The Commission further added that it had issued an advisory on August 14, 2024, directing all medical colleges to implement anti-drug measures under the Nasha Mukt Abhiyan. It added, "Several colleges have submitted their ATRs directly to the Department of Social Justice & Empowerment, as instructed."
NMC further added that the follow-up action would be initiated after receiving the consolidated data. "The Anti-Ragging Cell has been asked to seek details and propose further action," the Commission further mentioned.
The officials at Delhi-based RML Hospital have, however, acknowledged that while a committee was constituted and activities had been initiated, some SOP implementations are still underway and the ATR was not sent to the Apex Medical Commission. An official from AIIMS said that committee-related documents were shared with the NDDTC in Ghaziabad but not with the Social Justice Ministry, as mandated.
According to officials, under the campaign, medical colleges were prioritised because students living in hostels face a higher risk of substance use due to academic pressure, stress, peer influence, and limited supervision. The experts have warned that without enforceable reporting, the initiative risked remained symbolic rather than effective.
TOI has reported that across the country, the colleges that have submitted the ATRs include institutions in Himachal Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Gujarat, Kerala, Rajasthan, Assam, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal.

Stubble burning contributed only 3.5% to Delhi’s PM2.5 levels in 2025: RTI

 Tribune India: New Delhi: Tuesday, 30 December 2025.

Stubble burning contributed only 3.5% to Delhi’s PM2.5 levels in 2025, a sharp decline from 13% in 2020, Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) has revealed in response to a Right to Information (RTI).
The RTI, filed by environmental activist Amit Gupta, shows that for data on contribution of different sources to Delhi’s PM2.5 and PM10 levels, the CPCB continues to rely on the 2018 TERI-ARAI Source Apportionment report.
The CPCB in its response has not provided any updated, comprehensive assessment of pollution sources in Delhi-NCR.
Data shared by the Central Pollution Control Board shows that the average contribution of stubble burning to Delhi’s PM2.5 levels was 3.5% in 2025 (October-December), 10.6% in 2024, 11% in 2023, 9% in 2022, 13% in 2021 and 13% in 2020.
The Tribune has reported that in one of the earlier RTI replies, the Central Pollution Control Board has revealed that around 8,600 FIRs were registered against farmers in Punjab and Haryana over the past two years for stubble burning, with nearly Rs 60 crore recovered as fines.
Gupta pointed out that enforcement against farmers has been aggressive and financially punitive. Meanwhile, enforcement against major pollution sources within Delhi-NCR remains weak, he said.
“Garbage burning continues year-round, construction and demolition norms are routinely flouted, road dust mitigation is inadequate, diesel generators operate unchecked, older vehicles emit high pollution and industries and thermal power plants continue to discharge pollutants,” Gupta said.
Together, these sources contribute 85-90% of PM2.5 in the NCR region.
PM2.5 is the most lethal air pollutant, linked to heart disease, stroke, asthma, pregnancy complications and premature deaths.