Times of India: Chandigarh: Wednesday,
January 25, 2017.
The Punjab
and Haryana high court has held that once the trial of a case is in progress, the
information related to the case cannot be provided to the accused under the
Right to Information (RTI) Act. HC passed these orders while dismissing a
petition filed by former Haryana DGP M S Malik who was seeking information
related to documents on the basis of which he was booked by CBI in 2006
regarding alleged irregularities in the selection of police constables.
CBI had
denied the information, submitting that the investigation in the case might be
over but the offender's prosecution continues and therefore, would be
compromised if the required information, as such, is allowed to be acceded at
the request of the petitioner.
Dismissing
Malik's petition, Justice G S Sandhawalia of the HC held that the apprehension
put forth by CBI, is actual and not a mere camouflage to deny the information.
"The
procedure or the methodology involved in the investigation, as such, would also
be, thus, exposed and would lead to hampering the prosecution case, if, at this
stage, the information is supplied which is of vital public interest. The
intrusion into the supervision, as such, of the investigation, which is sought
by an accused person, would only expose the officers to the external pressures
and constrict the freedom with which the investigation had been conducted and
the prosecution which has to be carried on," observed Justice Sandhawalia
in his detailed order passed on January 18.
The former
DGP had approached the HC after his application for the information under RTI
Act was turned down by the CBI as well as the central information commission.
Malik wanted
statements of all the witnesses recorded while conducting the preliminary
inquiry in 2005 and also the recommendations made by the then director, CBI,
for including his name in the FIR recorded under Section 13 of the Prevention
of Corruption Act, 1988 and for recommending his prosecution in relation to
irregularities in selection of constables in government railway police.
CBI, on the
other hand, had argued that the challan had been presented and the case was
pending adjudication before the trial court. The information sought was
exempted under section 8(1)(g) & (h) of the RTI Act. The disclosure of the
statements would identify the source of information and therefore, endanger the
life and physical safety of the witnesses, CBI had argued.
In this case,
Malik had alleged that an FIR against him was registered on June 19, 2006 by
the orders of CBI director Vijay Shankar, who was the batchmate of the then
Haryana DGP Nirmal Singh, who had a service rivalry with him and thus, he had been
falsely implicated in the case.
.JPG)
.JPG)
