भ्रष्टाचार और मानवाधिकार उल्लंघन से जुड़ी जानकारी RTI Act के तहत देने से इनकार नहीं किया जा सकता: मद्रास हाईकोर्ट

Live Law: Chennai: Wednesday, 14^th October 2026.
मद्रास हाईकोर्ट ने कहा है कि सतर्कता एवं भ्रष्टाचार निरोधक निदेशालय (DVAC) को सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम (RTI Act) के तहत मिली छूट का इस्तेमाल भ्रष्टाचार और मानवाधिकार उल्लंघन से संबंधित जानकारी रोकने के लिए नहीं किया जा सकता।

जस्टिस हेमंत चंदनगौदर ने स्पष्ट किया कि RTI अधिनियम की धारा 24(4) के तहत किसी विभाग को छूट दिए जाने के बावजूद, भ्रष्टाचार के आरोपों और मानवाधिकार उल्लंघन से संबंधित जानकारी इस छूट के दायरे से बाहर रहती है।
अदालत ने यह भी कहा कि DVAC मैनुअल के नियम 29 के तहत जांच संबंधी जानकारी को गोपनीय बताकर ऐसा अपवाद नहीं बनाया जा सकता, जिसकी अनुमति RTI अधिनियम स्वयं नहीं देता।
हाईकोर्ट ने तमिलनाडु सरकार की उस याचिका को खारिज कर दिया, जिसमें राज्य सूचना आयोग के उस आदेश को चुनौती दी गई थी, जिसके तहत अधिकारियों के नाम और अन्य पहचान संबंधी विवरण हटाकर जांच के रिकॉर्ड उपलब्ध कराने का निर्देश दिया गया था।
क्या था मामला?
एक सेवानिवृत्त पुलिस महानिदेशक (DGP) ने RTI आवेदन दाखिल कर कथित भ्रष्टाचार के एक मामले में की गई जांच से संबंधित दस्तावेज मांगे थे। इनमें जांच रिपोर्ट की प्रतियां, सरकार द्वारा उठाए गए सवाल, जांच अधिकारी द्वारा दर्ज किए गए बयान और जांच के दौरान एकत्र किए गए दस्तावेज शामिल थे।
हालांकि, DVAC के लोक सूचना अधिकारी ने RTI अधिनियम की धारा 8(1)(g) का हवाला देते हुए जानकारी देने से इनकार कर दिया। इस प्रावधान के तहत ऐसी जानकारी देने से छूट है, जिसके खुलासे से किसी व्यक्ति की जान या शारीरिक सुरक्षा को खतरा हो सकता है।
सेवानिवृत्त अधिकारी की पहली अपील भी खारिज कर दी गई। इसके बाद उन्होंने तमिलनाडु राज्य सूचना आयोग में दूसरी अपील दाखिल की। आयोग ने संबंधित रिकॉर्ड उपलब्ध कराने का निर्देश दिया, जिसके खिलाफ राज्य सरकार ने हाईकोर्ट का रुख किया।
DVAC ने क्या दलील दी?
राज्य सरकार ने अदालत में तर्क दिया कि जांच से जुड़े दस्तावेजों का खुलासा करने से गोपनीय सूत्रों और गवाहों की सुरक्षा खतरे में पड़ सकती है। सरकार ने यह भी कहा कि तीसरे पक्ष से संबंधित जानकारी साझा नहीं की जा सकती और DVAC मैनुअल का नियम 29 जांच संबंधी सूचनाओं को गोपनीय रखने का प्रावधान करता है।
राज्य की ओर से यह भी दलील दी गई कि रिकॉर्ड की बड़ी मात्रा होने के कारण उनमें से सभी नाम और पहचान संबंधी विवरण हटाना व्यावहारिक रूप से कठिन होगा।
दूसरी ओर, सेवानिवृत्त अधिकारी ने कहा कि वह स्वयं उस जांच का हिस्सा थे, जिसे अंततः उनके पक्ष में बंद कर दिया गया था। इसलिए उन्हें यह जानने का अधिकार है कि जांच किन तथ्यों और दस्तावेजों के आधार पर की गई।
उन्होंने यह भी कहा कि किसी गवाह या सूत्र की जान को वास्तविक खतरा होने का कोई ठोस सबूत पेश नहीं किया गया और नाम हटाने में होने वाली प्रशासनिक कठिनाई सूचना देने से इनकार करने का आधार नहीं हो सकती।
RTI अधिनियम के तहत छूट पर कोर्ट की टिप्पणी
जस्टिस हेमंत चंदनगौदर ने धारा 24(4) के प्रभाव पर विचार करते हुए कहा कि DVAC को सरकारी आदेश के जरिए RTI अधिनियम से छूट दी गई है, लेकिन अधिनियम का प्रावधान स्पष्ट करता है कि भ्रष्टाचार और मानवाधिकार उल्लंघन से संबंधित जानकारी पर यह छूट लागू नहीं होती।
अदालत ने कहा कि किसी विभाग का आंतरिक प्रशासनिक निर्देश RTI अधिनियम में उपलब्ध छूट के अतिरिक्त कोई नई छूट पैदा नहीं कर सकता।
DVAC मैनुअल के नियम 29 का उल्लेख करते हुए कोर्ट ने कहा:
“जांच के दौरान एकत्र की गई जानकारी को गोपनीय मानने का आंतरिक प्रशासनिक निर्देश ऐसी छूट नहीं बना सकता, जो RTI अधिनियम में मौजूद नहीं है।”
कोर्ट ने स्पष्ट किया कि गोपनीयता का पहलू यह तय करने में प्रासंगिक हो सकता है कि किसी विशेष जानकारी को विश्वास में दिया गया था या नहीं, लेकिन इसके आधार पर जांच के पूरे रिकॉर्ड को रोकना उचित नहीं है।
गवाहों की सुरक्षा के लिए ठोस आधार जरूरी
अदालत ने कहा कि राज्य सरकार ऐसा कोई ठोस सामग्री या सबूत पेश नहीं कर सकी, जिससे यह साबित हो कि संबंधित नामों और विवरणों का खुलासा करने से किसी व्यक्ति की जान या शारीरिक सुरक्षा को खतरा होगा।
कोर्ट के अनुसार, केवल यह सामान्य आशंका जताना कि जानकारी सामने आने से किसी की सुरक्षा प्रभावित हो सकती है, RTI अधिनियम की धारा 8(1)(g) के तहत छूट देने के लिए पर्याप्त नहीं है।
अदालत ने यह भी स्पष्ट किया कि जांच का हिस्सा होने मात्र से संबंधित अधिकारी को जांच के प्रत्येक दस्तावेज को प्राप्त करने का असीमित अधिकार नहीं मिल जाता। यदि किसी दस्तावेज में किसी असंबंधित तीसरे पक्ष की वास्तविक निजी जानकारी है, तो उसे सुरक्षित रखा जा सकता है।
हालांकि, राज्य सरकार पूरे रिकॉर्ड को रोकने के लिए पर्याप्त आधार प्रस्तुत नहीं कर सकी।
राज्य सरकार की याचिका खारिज
इन टिप्पणियों के साथ मद्रास हाईकोर्ट ने तमिलनाडु राज्य सूचना आयोग के आदेश को बरकरार रखा और राज्य सरकार की याचिका खारिज कर दी।
अदालत के फैसले का सार यह है कि RTI के तहत विभाग को मिली छूट या जांच रिकॉर्ड की गोपनीयता का हवाला देकर भ्रष्टाचार से जुड़ी जानकारी को पूरी तरह रोका नहीं जा सकता। किसी विशेष जानकारी को रोकने के लिए कानून में निर्धारित छूट और उसके समर्थन में उचित आधार होना आवश्यक है।

Follow Info Commission's order, share inquiry records with ex-DGP Jangid: Madras High Court to DVAC

DT Next: Chennai: Wednesday, 14^th October 2026.

Retired DGP SR Jangid

The retired DGP argued that the inquiry, in which he was the subject, ended in his favour and that he was entitled to access the related records.
The Madras High Court has upheld an order of the State Information Commission directing the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) to disclose inquiry records to retired DGP SR Jangid, observing that the State failed to justify withholding the entire records under the RTI Act.
The Public Information Officer of the DVAC challenged the Tamil Nadu Information Commission's order directing it to furnish details of an inquiry in an alleged corruption case after masking the names and particulars of the officers concerned.
Jangid had sought copies of the inquiry reports, queries raised by the government, statements recorded by the inquiry officer, and other documents.
The Public Information Officer rejected the application under Section 8 (1) (g) of the RTI Act, citing risks to the life and physical safety of witnesses and confidential sources.
His appeal was also rejected, following which he approached the State Information Commission, which directed disclosure of the records.
When the matter came up for hearing before Justice Hemant Chandanagoudar, the State argued that disclosure could endanger witnesses and confidential sources, that third-party information could not be shared, and that masking names in voluminous records was impracticable.
The retired DGP argued that the inquiry, in which he was the subject, ended in his favour and that he was entitled to access the related records.
He contended that there was no evidence of any real threat to witnesses or sources, and that the names of other officers could be masked, as administrative difficulty was not a ground to deny information.
Though DVAC was exempted from the RTI Act under Section 24 (4) through a Government Order dated August 26, 2008, the proviso to the section makes it clear that the exemption does not apply to information relating to allegations of corruption and human rights violations, the court noted.
The judge also rejected the DVAC's argument that inquiry details were confidential under Rule 29 of the DVAC Manual, and observed that an internal administrative instruction could not create an exemption beyond those provided under the RTI Act.
While confidentiality could be considered to determine whether specific information was supplied in confidence, it could not be used to justify withholding the entire inquiry records, it said.
The court held that Jangid was entitled to the detailed inquiry records, as the State had failed to justify withholding the entire records under Sections 24 (4) or 8 (1) (g) of the RTI Act.
The court directed the Public Information Officer to furnish the records in accordance with the Tamil Nadu State Information Commission's order dated May 30, 2024, after masking the names and particulars of other officers.
For documents attracting Section 11, the prescribed procedure must be followed without withholding other information that can be disclosed.
Upholding the Information Commission's order dated May 30, 2024, the court dismissed the writ petition.

RTI at 21: 3.85 lakh cases pending, procedural hurdles flagged in returned appeals

The Print: New Delhi: Wednesday, 14^th October 2026.

As many as 3.85 lakh appeals and complaints were pending across 28 information commissions as of June 30, 2026, while concerns have been raised over cases being returned without orders, according to a report by a transparency watchdog.
As the Right to Information (RTI) Act completed 21 years on October 12, the report by Satark Nagrik Sangathan (SNS) found that nine information commissions returned 37,701 cases without passing orders between July 2025 and June 2026.
The figure covers only the nine commissions that provided the data.
The Central Information Commission (CIC) accounted for 14,603 returned cases, followed by the Maharashtra State Information Commission with 14,140, Bihar with 4,417 and Gujarat with 3,276, the report said.
Five commissions did not provide data on the number of appeals and complaints returned.
Anjali Bhardwaj, founder of SNS, told PTI that the central government and some state governments had prescribed formats for filing second appeals, and commissions returned cases that did not conform to those formats.
She claimed some appeals were returned over minor defects such as missing page numbers. “The commission must facilitate people’s right to information and not create unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles in accessing information,” she said.
The report said the CIC returned 14,603 cases against 31,179 registered during the period under review. It also cited earlier data showing that nearly 95 per cent of appeals returned by the CIC were not re-filed.
Amrita Johri, who is associated with SNS, said that many RTI applicants from poor and marginalised communities seek information about their basic entitlements and often pursue their cases without legal assistance.
She said commissions should take up appeals as long as the basic material is provided and called for the practice of returning appeals and complaints to be discontinued.
The concerns come amid rising pendency at the CIC.
Transparency campaigner Commodore Lokesh Batra (Retd.) told PTI that pending cases at the CIC had increased by 9,378 between January 1 and October 12, 2026, despite it having its full strength of 11 commissioners, including the chief information commissioner.
“This is a very worrisome situation and the CIC should be worried and take steps to reduce the pendency, like by working late hours,” he said, adding the “guardians of transparency” had turned into “guardians of opacity”.
Fourteen information commissions across the country may take a year or more to dispose of appeals and complaints, according to the report.
The estimated waiting period was 19 years and eight months in Tripura, 19 years and two months in Madhya Pradesh and 18 years in Chhattisgarh, it claimed. PTI MHS RT
(This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.)

Forest Dept refuses autopsy reports of cheetah under RTI, cites national security

The Tribune: New Delhi: Wednesday, 14^th October 2026.
Kuno National Park has denied a wildlife activist copies of post-mortem reports of cheetahs that died at Kuno National Park, citing national security concerns and sensitive memoranda of understanding (MoUs) with foreign countries. The denial comes as the Right to Information (RTI) Act marks its 21st anniversary.

It raises questions about transparency in the management of India’s cheetah reintroduction programme. Wildlife activist Ajay Dubey had sought copies of the post-mortem reports from the Madhya Pradesh wildlife headquarters.
The query was transferred to Kuno National Park, where the divisional forest officer denied the information, citing concerns over sensitive pacts with foreign countries. Speaking to The Tribune, Dubey questioned why reports on the deaths of cheetahs could not be disclosed.
“I had sought post mortem copies of Cheetahs’ which have died from the Madhya Pradesh wildlife headquarters. It transferred the query to Kuno National Park and its divisional forest officer denied the information. How could post mortem be a matter of national security. Have we signed any MoU with Africa that refuses to divulge post mortem details? Cheetah is also a schedule 1 species like tiger, lion and leopard. So when the information about the other three species can be shared why not Cheetah,” he said.
Dubey also sought information about forest department officers who travelled abroad for cheetah-related training. However, he said, the department did not provide the details.
“The reply which I received is that they don’t have such details,” he said.
Kuno National Park lost another cheetah cub on October 12. India currently has 53 cheetahs.
The reintroduction programme began in September 2022 with the first batch of eight arriving from Namibia. Another 12 cheetahs were brought from South Africa in 2023, followed by nine from Botswana in February 2026.

Maharashtra RTI backlog: Over 1 lakh appeals, complaints disposed of in 18 months; Mumbai clears 40,000

The Times of India: Mumbai: Wednesday, 14^th October 2026.
Maharashtra’s information commission disposed of 1,06,122 second appeals and complaints between April 2025 and September 2026, with Mumbai and the Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR) accounting for a substantial share of the clearance drive.

However, the scale of disposal also highlights the continuing challenge of ensuring that citizens receive public records without prolonged appellate delays.
The figures assume significance for Mumbai and MMR residents who use the Right to Information (RTI) Act to seek records from civic bodies, housing and urban development authorities, revenue offices and state departments.
The Mumbai headquarters and Brihanmumbai benches together disposed of 36,911 second appeals and 3,620 complaints during the 18-month period. The Konkan bench, which covers districts including Thane and Palghar, cleared another 6,601 appeals and 1,616 complaints.
State chief information commissioner Rahul Pande met chief minister Devendra Fadnavis on RTI Day, marking 21 years of the legislation, and presented a briefing on the commission’s functioning along with an authentic Marathi edition of the Act.
CM Fadnavis described the disposal performance as unprecedented and called for greater proactive disclosure of information and the use of technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI), to manage the heavy caseload.
For citizens, the key test will be whether faster disposal translates into quicker access to information and fewer appeals in the first place.
Mumbai’s share: heavy workload, significant clearance
The Mumbai headquarters disposed of 28,509 second appeals and 2,857 complaints, while the Brihanmumbai bench cleared 8,402 appeals and 763 complaints.
The workload remains substantial.
Between April 2025 and August 2026, the Mumbai headquarters received 20,257 fresh appeals and 1,411 complaints. Brihanmumbai received 17,099 appeals and 806 complaints over the same period.
As of March 31, 2025, the two benches had 19,554 appeals and 3,099 complaints pending at the Mumbai headquarters, and 5,152 appeals and 2,745 complaints at Brihanmumbai.
The Konkan bench began the period with 7,870 pending appeals and 4,236 complaints. It received 6,851 new appeals and 1,575 complaints, while disposing of 6,601 appeals and 1,616 complaints.
The figures underline the pressure on information commissions serving a region with a dense concentration of government offices, municipal authorities and development agencies.
They also show why the disposal count alone cannot establish how long an individual applicant must wait for a hearing or a final order.
AI push amid staffing constraints
Pande told the chief minister that the RTI Act helps bridge the information imbalance between citizens and public authorities.
The commission’s emphasis, he said, has been on maximising voluntary, proactive and suo motu disclosures under Section 4(1)(b) of the Act.
The provision requires public authorities to publish specified categories of information proactively, reducing the need for citizens to file individual applications for routine records.
The commission also highlighted manpower shortages and budgetary constraints. Fadnavis urged it to explore AI and other advanced technologies to improve the handling of incoming cases.
Any technology-led intervention will need to support, rather than replace, statutory scrutiny and reasoned decisions by information commissioners.
The immediate administrative priorities remain timely hearings, accessible case-status information and compliance with disclosure orders.
Other regional benches contribute to clearance
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar disposed of 13,914 second appeals and 1,409 complaints. Pune cleared 12,404 appeals and 4,218 complaints, while Nashik disposed of 11,925 appeals and 1,755 complaints.
Nagpur cleared 6,115 appeals and 1,286 complaints, and Amravati disposed of 4,140 appeals and 208 complaints.
Statewide, the supplied figures put disposals during April 2025–September 2026 at 92,010 second appeals and 14,112 complaints.Fresh receipts were reported at 87,899 appeals and 12,372 complaints through August 2026. Because the receipt and disposal periods differ, these numbers should not be directly compared as a like-for-like measure of backlog reduction.
Since the commission began functioning under the RTI framework, the supplied cumulative figures record 7,37,520 second appeals and 1,15,175 complaints received, against disposals of 6,67,486 appeals and 1,01,826 complaints.
These totals require reconciliation with the commission’s underlying annual and pending-case records before being treated as a complete account of current pendency.
The commission marked RTI Day with orientation programmes for public information officers and first appellate authorities, stakeholder discussions and awareness camps.
For Maharashtra’s RTI users, the next measure of success will be whether the clearance drive, stronger proactive disclosure and better staffing make it easier to obtain information from public authorities without having to pursue repeated appeals.

SIC may seek clarification from Kochi Corporation on alleged move to curb RTI applications

The Hindu: Kochi: Wednesday, 14^th October 2026.
Corporation had decided to hand over details of repeat RTI applicants to the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau for a probe into their financial backgrounds; SIC meeting on Wednesday to discuss the issue after taking suo motu notice of the developments; Commission sources say the RTI Act does not prescribe a limit on the number of applications a person can file

The State Information Commission (SIC), Keralam, is likely to seek clarity from the Kochi Corporation on its reported move against those who repeatedly file applications under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
The civic body had last week decided to hand over details of those who repeatedly filed RTI applications to the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) for a probe into their financial backgrounds.
The civic authorities maintained that the decision was taken in the wake of complaints that several applicants were misusing the provisions of the Act.
Mayor V.K. Minimol had informed the Corporation council that the civic body would hand over the list of such applicants to the anti-corruption agency. She had said that the move was not aimed at curbing the provisions of the RTI Act but at acting against those misusing the Act.
Meanwhile, a meeting of the SIC scheduled for Wednesday will discuss the issue after taking suo motu notice of the developments.
The Commission is likely to seek information from the civic body on the circumstances in which such a decision was taken.
The forum may also find out whether any resolution was passed by the civic body seeking to restrain RTI applications, sources privy to the development said.
Sources in the SIC said no restriction could be imposed on the number of RTI applications one may file as the law did not prescribe a ceiling on the permissible number.
The legal provisions of the RTI flow from Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution, which guarantees to all citizens the right to freedom of speech and expression. No punishment or cost could be imposed on any citizen, nor could steps be taken to discourage anyone from seeking any information from an authority as mandated by law under the RTI Act, sources said.
SC’s observations
However, applicants shall also be mindful of the observations of the Supreme Court in the CBSE Vs Bandhopadhyay and Others case, in which the apex court pointed out that the Act shall not be “misused or abused to become a tool to obstruct national development and integration and to destroy the peace and tranquillity and harmony among citizens.”
The court further suggested that the Act shall not be “converted into a tool of oppression or intimidation of honest officials discharging their duty.
The nation does not want a scenario where 75% of staff of public authorities spend 75% of their time in collecting and furnishing information to applicants instead of discharging their duties,” SIC sources pointed out.

Madras HC upholds RTI panel’s order on graft report

New Indian Express: Chennai: Wednesday, 14^th October 2026.
Officials said disclosure could endanger witnesses and confidential sources, exempting inquiry reports from disclosure under Section 8(1)(g) of the RTI Act.

The Madras HC has dismissed an appeal filed by the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption (DVAC) against the TN State Information Commission’s order to furnish the details of an inquiry conducted against former IPS officer SR Jangid.
The DVAC had filed the appeal against May 30, 2024, order of the commission which had directed the agency to furnish the details sought by Jangid under the RTI Act regarding the inquiry held against him over alleged corruption.
It had stated disclosure of such information would expose the witnesses and confidential sources to harm and such inquiry reports are exempted for divulging under section 8 (1) (g) of the RTI Act.
However, Justice Hemant Chandangoudar, while dismissing the petition, said RTI exemption for intelligence and security agencies cannot be used for denying details on corruption and human rights violations.
He noted the petitioner seeking the information is none other than the officer against whom such inquiry was conducted. Referring to Rule 29 of the DVAC Manual, the judge said an internal administrative instruction requiring information gathered on enquiry to be treated as confidential cannot create an exemption which is not provided under provisions of the RTI Act.

Celebrating 21 Years of the Right to Information Act: A Milestone in Transparent Governance- By Amrit Pal Sidhu

Babushahi.com: Chandigarh: Tuesday, 13^th October 2026.
A Landmark Law That Puts Transparency and Accountability in the Spotlight, RTI Emerges As a Cornerstone of Democratic Governance

The Punjab State Information Commission (PSIC) commemorated the State-Level Right to Information Day in a event held at the UT State Guest House in Chandigarh, This celebration marked 21 years since the implementation of the Right to Information Act, 2005, a pivotal legislation that has played a crucial role in promoting transparency, accountability, and citizen empowerment within democratic governance.
A highlight of the event was the release of the book "RTI and Good Governance," authored by Punjab State Information Commissioner Harpreet Sandhu. The book was unveiled under the patronage of Punjab Chief Information Commissioner Inderpal Singh Dhanna.
 It emphasizes the importance of the Right to Information framework in fostering a transparent, accountable, and responsible administration. The publication aims to enhance public understanding of the RTI Act's objectives and provisions, its evolution over two decades, and the emerging dimensions of information governance in light of contemporary legal and administrative developments.
Punjab's Minister for Good Governance and Information Technology, Aman Arora, addressed the gathering, underscoring the empowerment that the Right to Information Act, 2005, has provided to ordinary citizens. He highlighted that the Act ensures transparency and accountability in government operations, aligning with the constitutional spirit of a government that is of the people, by the people, and for the people.
Arora emphasized that public institutions must operate transparently and remain accountable to citizens to achieve this objective. He also noted the state government's initiatives to strengthen good governance through digital platforms by ensuring timely service delivery and accountability for delays.
The event was graced by prominent figures including Punjab Chief Information Commissioner Inderpal Singh Dhanna; State Information Commissioners Sandeep Dhaliwal, Varinderjit Singh Billing, Harpreet Sandhu, Dr. Bhupinder Singh Bath, and Pooja Gupta; as well as former Punjab Chief Information Commissioners Rajan Kashyap, IAS (Retd.), Ramesh Inder Singh, IAS (Retd.), S.S. Channy, IAS (Retd.), and Justice Harnaresh Singh Gill. The audience also included Chandigarh DGP Sagarpreet Singh Hooda, a delegation from the Western Command led by Colonel Jagdeep Sandhu, senior police and civil administration officers from the Punjab Government, former High Court judges, and Public Information Officers (PIOs) from across Punjab.
Rajan Kashyap, the founding Chief Information Commissioner of Punjab, shared his reflections on the early days of implementing the RTI Act. Former Chief Information Commissioners Ramesh Inder Singh and S.S. Channy also contributed their insights during the occasion.
The book "RTI and Good Governance" features special messages from Chief Justice of India Justice Surya Kant, Punjab Governor and Administrator of UT Chandigarh Gulab Chand Kataria, and Chief Information Commissioner of India Raj Kumar Goyal, IAS (Retd.).
These messages highlight the constitutional and democratic significance of the publication. The book has also received endorsements from Wajahat Habibullah, India’s first Chief Information Commissioner, and Rajan Kashyap, Punjab’s first Chief Information Commissioner.
Authored by Harpreet Sandhu under the auspices of the Punjab State Information Commission, the book reiterates a commitment to enhancing public awareness, promoting responsible implementation of the RTI framework, and fostering a culture of transparency and accountability in public institutions.
The event served as an important platform to review the achievements over the past 21 years while reaffirming the ongoing need for effective implementation of the RTI Act in the larger public interest.
As stakeholders continue to advocate for transparent governance, events like these underscore the enduring significance of the Right to Information Act in empowering citizens and strengthening democratic foundations.

Forest dept denies Cheetah death reports under RTI, cites risk to foreign relations

Daily Pioneer: Kadapa: Tuesday, 13^th October 2026.
The Forest Department has refused to provide post-mortem reports of cheetahs that died at Kuno National Park, citing concerns that disclosure could adversely affect India’s relations with foreign countries.

In response to an application filed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the department said Project Cheetah is a national project of the Government of India, implemented through international cooperation. The department said it has signed Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) with foreign countries for the project, and disclosing the requested information could affect India’s relations with them. The department invoked Section 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act, 2005, to claim exemption from sharing the records.
The Kuno Divisional Forest Officer’s office issued the reply on October 9, 2026. Activist Ajay Dubey, who filed the application, questioned the department’s reasoning, asking how making post-mortem reports of dead cheetahs public could adversely affect India’s foreign relations.
Dubey had submitted the RTI application on January 28, 2026, seeking information on four aspects of Project Cheetah. A key demand was for post-mortem reports and related records of cheetahs that had died in Madhya Pradesh from January 1, 2024, until the date of disclosure.
The matter had also gone through the first appeal process. Following an appellate order dated September 17, 2026, the office of the Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife) and Chief Wildlife Warden, Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, sent a letter to the Kuno Divisional Forest Officer on September 18, directing necessary action. However, the department subsequently refused to provide the reports in its October 9 response.
Dubey also sought information on the conservation and management of cheetahs at Kuno National Park, Gandhi Sagar Wildlife Sanctuary, and Rani Durgavati Nauradehi Tiger Reserve. His application included records relating to foreign visits and correspondence with various government institutions.
Questioning the decision, Dubey said concerns over sensitive information about living cheetahs might be understandable. Still, he found it hard to see how post-mortem reports on dead animals could harm international relations.
The dispute centres on the department’s reliance on the RTI Act’s foreign-relations exemption. The response does not explain how disclosing the specific reports would affect India’s relations with other countries, while the activist has challenged the justification for withholding them.
The issue raises questions about transparency in Project Cheetah and the grounds on which the government can withhold information about animal deaths under the conservation programme from the public.

Andhra Pradesh Govt Departments Send RTI Replies After 10 Years

ETV Bharat: Kadapa: Tuesday, 13^th October 2026.
While a few departments responded at the time, most offices ignored his applications for years.

Suresh Babu received RTI responses after 10 years of filing them. (Eenadu)

Information sought under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, is supposed to be provided within the prescribed time limit of 30 days. However, several government departments in Andhra Pradesh’s YSR Kadapa district have taken a decade to respond to applications filed in 2015.
Thummaluru Suresh Babu, a research scholar in the Department of Journalism at Yogi Vemana University (YVU) in Kadapa district, began research in 2012 on the topic 'Implementation of the Right to Information Act-2005: A Study in Kadapa District'.
As part of his PhD research, he filed applications under Section 6(1) of the RTI Act in 2015, seeking information on the implementation of the legislation across various government departments in the district.
While a few departments provided responses at the time, most offices allegedly ignored his applications.
Suresh Babu then collected information through other sources, completed his research thesis and submitted it to the university. YVU awarded him a PhD on September 5, 2017.
Now, in 2026, several departments are sending the requested information through registered post and Speed Post, over 10 years after the applications were filed.
Babu said that responses from 46 departments that had failed to provide the information earlier have brought renewed attention to delays and administrative negligence in implementing the RTI Act.

HT interview: RTI assured openness, digitisation brought logins, says activist Nikhil Dey- Articles by Himanshi Dahiya

Hindustan Times: HT interview: Tuesday, 13^th October 2026.
Two decades on, the law is under strain. The 2019 amendments gave the Centre control over the tenure and salaries of information commissioners.

RTI activist and MKSS co-founder Nikhil Dey speaks about what the law meant when it was won, how far it has been weakened, and what must happen next. (HT illustration)

Twenty-one years ago, on October 12, 2005, the Right to Information (RTI) Act came into force, giving every Indian citizen the legal right to question the state. The law grew out of a movement that began in the villages of Rajasthan, where the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) held public hearings to compare official records with what villagers knew from the ground.
Two decades on, the law is under strain. The 2019 amendments gave the Centre control over the tenure and salaries of information commissioners. Several commissions have faced vacancies and backlogs, and activists say the Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDA) threatens the transparency regime.
In an interview with HT, RTI activist and MKSS co-founder Nikhil Dey speaks about what the law meant when it was won, how far it has been weakened, and what must happen next. Edited excerpts:
The RTI movement grew out of villages and public hearings in Rajasthan. What did it mean for the people to gain that right, and does it still matter today?
It came out of villages and rural and semi-urban areas. It came out of poor people’s questions, and it became something everyone uses. That is significant. It became potent when we took it into the public domain. When someone puts information obtained through RTI in the media, it has an almost chemical effect. Otherwise, it sits at home with you. When you make an exposé public with proof, that combination creates impact, much as investigative journalism does. When we started village-based public hearings, it showed that if you make information transparent, anyone can use it, especially those with the greatest stake.
Look at the Mela we held recently in Beawar to mark the anniversary of the law. Rural women turned up in hundreds, defending RTI with a strong understanding of it. People who initially fought for the law were there, as were those who later came to use it. You now have a whole range of people working naturally on transparency and accountability.
In recent years there have been several amendments to the Act. How serious is the damage?
(It is) Serious. The backbone of the law is the information commissions, and many have vacancies. What has happened through the DPDP Act is a potential killer of RTI. It has made things very difficult.
Yet you have a huge community energised by this law. There is no village, town or mohalla in any city without one or two keen RTI users. That has kept it going. They keep cursing the amendments and saying the law is not working, but they are doing amazing things in creative ways.
Governance has moved online, and so many records are now digital. What is RTI’s relevance in this context?
RTI said that what was hidden under the Official Secrets Act would now be made public. Then governments started digitising information, and as they did, they put it behind admin logins that only officers can see. That is contrary to the RTI Act, which said that as you digitise, you should make information public. “Open data” is a misnomer. The bulk of what matters to citizens is behind logins that a Joint Secretary, Deputy Secretary or BDO can access, but others cannot.
That is why we have pushed to remove admin logins. Take the Jan Soochna portal in Rajasthan, which covers 169 departments and 330 schemes, with government expenditure and transactions disclosed online in real time. It has had about 37 crore visits since 2019 and over 50 crore pieces of information downloaded. Even if a tiny percentage of that would have become RTIs, think of how many RTIs it has prevented, because people get the full audit trail of their applications.
The 2019 amendment gave the Centre control over the tenure and salaries of information commissioners. Commissions face vacancies and backlogs. What is the fix?

First, full and time-bound appointments. Information Commissions are left vacant for long periods. In Rajasthan, there has been no Chief Information Commissioner for some time, and the commission cannot function without a chief.
The amendments made it worse by making commissions far more subservient to the government. We have seen the same debate around the appointment of election commissioners. For information commissioners too, the formula is the Prime Minister, the Leader of Opposition and a Cabinet Minister chosen by the Prime Minister. The bottom line is how independent you make the institution, in appointments and in functioning. They have made it more subservient to the executive, which is terrible.
RTI users have faced threats and assaults, and several have been killed. The Whistleblowers Protection Act remains unimplemented. How can ordinary citizens protect themselves?
It is terrible that the Act has not been implemented. There should be accountability for every attack and every death. If an RTI user is attacked while seeking information or in the follow-up, it should be the state’s duty to not just inquire into that case but audit the entire institution. If someone has been murdered, something is seriously wrong with the whole office. If a sarpanch attacks someone who asks questions about a road, the whole panchayat should be audited by state government auditors. The attack is meant to silence the person, so the response should be to investigate even more, so they know it can cost them much more.
Every attack should get a fact-finding, and every murder should be pursued. Families often fight very lonely battles. Some of these people are as good as martyrs, and they are often forgotten. That more than a hundred, 10 or 15 people have been killed shows how important the law is and how dogged its users are.

RTI Act| Exemption Granted To Directorate Of Vigilance & Anti-Corruption Doesn’t Apply To Information Related To Allegations Of Corruption & Human Rights Violations: Madras High Court

Verdictum: Madras: Tuesday, 13^th October 2026.
The Madras High Court was considering a petition filed by the State of Tamil Nadu, challenging the order passed by the Tamil Nadu State Information Commission.

The Madras High Court has held that though the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) has been exempted from the operation of the RTI Act by G.O.Ms.No.158, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated August 26, 2008, however, as per the proviso to Section 24(4) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act), such exemption does not apply to information relating to allegations of corruption and human rights violations.
The High Court was considering a petition filed by the petitioner, the State of Tamil Nadu, challenging the order passed by the Tamil Nadu State Information Commission.
The Single Bench of Justice Hemant Chandangoudar held, “The first question for consideration is the effect of Section 24(4) of the RTI Act. The Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) has been exempted from the operation of the RTI Act by G.O.Ms.No.158, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 26.08.2008, issued under Section 24(4). However, the proviso to Section 24(4) makes it clear that such exemption does not apply to information relating to allegations of corruption and human rights violations.”
State Public Prosecutor R.Johnsathyan represented the Petitioner, while Standing Counsel C. Vigneshwaran represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
By the impugned order, the Public Information Officer of the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) was directed to furnish the information sought by S.R. Jangid, IPS, Retired DGP, second respondent, under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act), after masking the names and other particulars of the other officers concerned. The respondent Officer submitted an application under Section 6(1) of the RTI Act seeking information relating to the detailed enquiry conducted by the DVAC. He sought copies of the enquiry reports, the queries raised by the Government, the statements recorded by the Enquiry Officer and all documents collected during the enquiry.
The Public Information Officer rejected the request by order, invoking Section 8(1)(g) of the RTI Act. The first appeal filed by the second respondent was also rejected. Thereafter, the second respondent filed a second appeal before the Tamil Nadu State Information Commission under Section 19(3) of the RTI Act. During the proceedings before the Information Commission, the Public Information Officer furnished an item-wise reply. Thereafter, the Commission directed the Public Information Officer to furnish the information and copies of the documents sought by the second respondent. It was also directed that the names and other particulars of the other two officers be masked. The information was directed to be furnished within 45 days.
Reasoning
Considering that the Detailed Enquiry related to the allegations of corruption investigated by the DVAC, the Bench held that Section 24(4) cannot be relied upon as a complete bar to the information sought by the second respondent. “The request has to be considered with reference to the exemptions specifically provided under Section 8 of the RTI Act”, it stated.
The Bench further noted that no specific threat, circumstance or other material had been stated to support such an apprehension and held that a general assertion that disclosure may affect the safety of witnesses or third parties is not sufficient to attract Section 8(1)(g).
“In the present case, therefore, the State has not established that disclosure of the names of the third parties would endanger their life or physical safety. It has also not shown, in respect of each such person, that disclosure would reveal a confidential source of information or assistance given for enforcement purposes. Therefore, Section 8(1)(g) cannot be invoked as a blanket ground for withholding the names and particulars of all third parties”, it held.
As per the Bench, the direction issued by the Information Commission to furnish the information and copies of the documents sought by the respondent Officer, subject to masking the names and other particulars of the other officers concerned, was consistent with the provisions of the RTI Act.
Holding that the Officer was entitled to the information relating to the Detailed Enquiry conducted against him, subject to the limited exemptions recognised by the RTI Act, the Bench upheld the order passed by the Tamil Nadu State Information Commission.
Cause Title: State Of Tamil Nadu v. Tamil Nadu State Information Commission (Case No.: WP No. 22237 of 2024)
Appearance
Petitioner: State Public Prosecutor R. Johnsathyan, Govt Advocate N. Palanivel
Respondent: Standing Counsel C. Vigneshwaran, Advocates Nithyaesh Nataraj,, Vaibhav R.Venkatesh
(Click here to read/download Order)