Central Information CommissionP C Parakh vs Cbi on 5 December, 2016CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                           2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
                         Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066

                                             Decision No. CIC/SB/A/2015/000454
                                                                Dated 02.12.2016



Appellant                      :       Shri P.C. Parakh,
                                       4A-1, Jaagruthi Residency,
                                       East Maredpally,
                                       Secunderabad-500026.



Respondent                     :       Central Public Information Officer,
                                       Central Bureau of Investigation,
                                       Economic Offences-I,
                                       5-B, 3rd Floor, CGO Complex,
                                       New Delhi-110003.

Date of Hearing                :       02.12.2016

Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:


RTI application filed on           :       21.05.2015

CPIO's reply                       :       17.06.2015

First appeal filed on              :       22.06.2015

FAA's order                        :       20.07.2015

Second appeal filed on             :       27.07.2015

                                        ORDER1.    Shri P.C. Parakhfiled an application dated 21.05.2015under theRight to
Information Act, 2005(RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer
(CPIO), Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) seekinginformation on seven
points relating to investigations taken up by the CBI in respect of coal blocks
allocated between 1993 and 2005, including (i) number of companies that were



CIC/SB/A/2015/000454                                                         Page 1
 subjected to investigation and (ii) names of companies against whom FIRs were
registered.2.    The appellantfiled a second appeal dated 27.07.2015 before the
Commission on the grounds that the CPIO denied the information on the
grounds that the CBI is exempted fromRTI Act, 2005andthat without going
into the merits of the case and without expressing any opinion on his
contention, the First Appellate Authority (FAA) rejected his appeal and upheld
an erroneous order passed by the CPIO.The appellant states that since
investigations in coal block allocations are in respect of alleged corruption in
allocation,information sought by him is not covered by the exemption granted
to CBI under sub section (1) ofSection 24of the RTI Act. The appellant
requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to supply the information sought
by him.Hearing:3.    The appellant Shri PC Parkash attended the hearing through video
conferencing. The respondent was not present despite notice.4.    The     appellant submitted that the      information   sought has been
incorrectly denied by the respondent on the grounds that the CBI is exempted
from the provisions of theRTI Actas perSection 24(1)of the RTI Act. However,
since the information sought by him pertains to alleged corruption in allocation
of coal blocks, his matter will fall under the proviso toSection 24(1)of the RTI
Act and is, therefore, not covered by the exemptions granted to the CBI. The
appellant further submitted thatthe information sought is, merely, statistical in
nature, which will have no bearing on the course of investigation. Hence, the
CBI should be directed to supply the information sought for by him.CIC/SB/A/2015/000454                                                        Page 2
 Decision:5.    The Commission is also aware that underSection 24(1)r/wSecond
Schedule of the RTI Act, 2005, CBI has been declared an exempt organization.
Hence, the provisions of theRTI Actare not applicable to the CBI, except when
the information pertains to allegations of corruption or human rights
violations.   However, the High Court of Delhi in W.P. (C) 7453/2011 dated
09.10.2013 (Union of Indian vs Adarsh Sharma)has held that: -"5. .......if aninformation of the nature sought by the respondent is
     easily available with the Intelligence Bureau, the agency would be well-
     advised in assisting a citizen, by providing such an information,
     despite the fact that it cannot be accessed as a matter of right under
     the provisions ofRight to Information Act.............It is again made
     clear that information of this nature cannot be sought as a matter of
     right and it would be well within the discretion of the Intelligence
     Bureau whether to supply such information or not........."6.    In view of the above and the nature of information sought by the
appellant, the Commission would like the CBI to consider the request of the
appellant and provide information to the extent possible to the appellant.7.    The Commissiontook a serious view of the absence of the CPIO, CBI
despite notice. The Commission directs the CPIO to submit a written
statementbefore the Commission, explaining his absence,along with the
comments of First Appellate Authority, CBI, before 23.12.2016 both by post and
through e-mail at[email protected].8.    With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.CIC/SB/A/2015/000454                                                         Page 39.    Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.(Sudhir Bhargava)
                                                    Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy



(V.K. Sharma)
Designated Officer




CIC/SB/A/2015/000454                                                   Page 4