RTI Act Not Applicable To CBI, Punjab & Haryana HC Rejects Former Income Tax Officer's Plea Seeking Info On Agency's 'Trap' Against Him

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has rejected an Income Tax Officer's plea seeking information under the Right to information Act (RTI Act) relating to Trap Proceeding conducted against him by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

The Income Tax Officer was convicted in a corruption case and his appeal against the conviction is pending before the High Court. The Court noted that the information sought was required to strengthen his defence in appeal.

Justice Mahabir Singh Sindhu said, "the nature of information sought by him does not suggest any public interest; rather, it is a complete misuse of the provisions of the RTI Act, just to harass the officials of respondent-CBI with an ulterior motive."

The Court noted that CBI has been kept in Second Schedule to the RTI Act, therefore, his prayer was rightly rejected. The Agency's CPIO had intimated to the Petitioner that RTI Act is not applicable to CBI.

After rejection of statutory appeals, the Petitioner moved the High Court seeking a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the impugned orders.

Counsel for the petitioner argued that the information was denied under the garb of a Notification keeping CBI in Second Schedule however, the authorities including the Central Information Commission (CIC) overlooked Section 24 of RTI Act, Para 20 Part IV of Guide on RTI Act for Public Information Officers and various Memorandums issued by the Centre, which specifically state that RTI application seeking information pertaining to allegations of corruption is maintainable.

On the other hand, counsel for CIC submitted that petitioner is not a public spirited person and information sought by him cannot be provided for the reason that RTI Act is not applicable to CBI in view of the Notification issued in 2021.

After examining the submissions, the Court observed, "It transpires that petitioner was working as an Income Tax Officer and was convicted by learned Special Court, CBI, Patiala, Punjab vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.07.2008 in RC-4 of 01.02.2005 under Sections 7 and 13 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988..."

Justice Sindhu highlighted further noted that an appeal preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence is pending adjudication before the Co-ordinate Bench of the High Court and it transpires that the "information sought by petitioner relates to the aforesaid pending appeal and at this stage", he is trying to obtain some information under RTI Act, in order to strengthen his plea in appeal, which he failed during trial before the Special CBI Court.

Court said the petition is wholly misconceived and deserves to be dismissed with costs, however, taking a lenient view it rejected the plea without cost.

Mr. Nipun Bhardwaj, Advocate for Mr. Nikhil Ghai, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Arvind Seth, Senior Panel Counsel for respondent No.1.

Mr. Akashdeep Singh, Special PP, CBI for respondents No.2 and 3.

Title: Raj Kumar Arora v. Central Information Commission and others

Click here to read/download the order