Hindustan
Times: New Delhi: Saturday, 25 July 2015.
He lived in
fear for decades of being convicted as a traitor after the CBI booked him in
1988. But almost 30 years down the line, retired lieutenant general Nirmal Puri
found the “classified” information he allegedly leaked was freely available
under the Right to Information Act.
Even the
Supreme Court was astonished by the revelation on Friday while hearing a CBI
appeal against a Delhi high court order asking a trial court to reconsider its
decision to charge Puri in the wake of the new evidence.
“These secret
documents are of 1988. And now he gets an official copy of it under the RTI. If
this information can be given under the RTI then anybody can get the
document. You (government) only let out
the information,” the top court bench said.
Additional
solicitor general Pinky Anand, representing the CBI, said the new evidence
should be considered at the trial stage but the SC declined to interfere with
the HC order.
The
86-year-old Puri was arrested along with a defence contractor in 1988 under the
Official Secrets Act, three years after he left the army. The CBI alleged
during an income tax raid at the contractor’s offices and residence.
Puri’s
hand-written notes were recovered. It contained details of the procurements the
Indian army intended to make.
As he battled
it out in courts, Puri also filed an RTI application before the defence
ministry and the army asking if the Central Bureau of Investigation consulted
them before registering a case. Both refused to divulge details, compelling the
ex-army man to move the Central Information Commission, which ordered them to
respond.
In its reply,
the army said it told the CBI the documents were mere jottings of a retired
senior army officer and did not contain any information that could be
classified as secret – a stand Puri has been taking since his arrest.
The
colonial-era law has triggered controversy as the term “official secrets” isn’t
defined, leaving it open to misuse.
Once used by
the British Raj to target freedom fighters, the act was retained after
independence as the Indian state realised it needed to protect its secrets. But
in recent years, activists have said the provisions of the law are draconian
and run contrary to the principles of the Constitution.