WP(C) No. 15276 of 2011 · Kerala High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Right to Information Act, 2005
- Right toInformation Act, 2005 ss. 24, 24(4)
- Constitution of India art. 226
Judgment
V.CHITAMBARESH, J.-------------------------------W.P.(C) No. 15276 of 2011-------------------------------Dated this the 27th day of February, 2012J U D G M E N TThe petitioner who is an Ex-Member of LegislativeAssembly sought to elicit certain details regarding the Goonda-Police nexus in the Police Department by Ext.P1 application. Thesame has been turned down by Ext.P2 order of the AssistantInspector General of Police-I and affirmed in appeal by Ext.P4order of the Inspector General of Police (Head Quarters). Theorder is confirmed in further appeal by Ext.P8 order of the StateInformation Commission. Exts.P2, P4 and P8 orders are under challenge in this writ petition.
Sub-clause (4) of Section 24 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 is as follows:-(4)Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to such intelligence and security organisation, being organisations established by the State Government, as that Government may, from time to time, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify: Provided that the information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations W.P.(C) No.15276 of 20112shall not be excluded under this sub-section: Provided further that in the case of information sought for is in respect of allegations of violation of human rights, the information shall only be provided after the approval of the StateInformation Commission and, notwithstanding anything contained in Section 7, such information shall be provided within forty-five days from the date of receipt of the request.”
The Government has issued Ext.P6 and Ext.P7notifications in tune with Section 24(4) of the Right to Information Act, 2005. Several intelligence and security organisations including various wings of the Police Departmenthave been exempted from the Act as per the notifications. Theauthorities are therefore well founded in not divulging the information sought for by the petitioner which are sensitive in nature. The information sought for do not pertain to allegations of corruption and human rights violation so as to fall within the purview of proviso to section 24(4) of the Act. Any report regarding the Goonda-Police nexus cannot be divulged to the public as it is likely to be misused. The correctness of such reportis yet to be established and the identity of the informants cannot W.P.(C) No.15276 of 20113be revealed lest it would act as a deterrent.
I decline jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and dismiss the writ petition. No costs. V.CHITAMBARESH,Judge. nj. V.CHITAMBARESH, J. --------------------------------------W.P.(C) No. 15276 of 2011JUDGMENTDated:- 27th February, 2012--------------------------------------
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.