The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of exemptions under the RTI Act, including Section 8(1)(a), Section 8(1)(h), and Section 24, to justify the non-disclosure of information related to national security and ongoing investigations.

JUDGMENT :

Prathiba M. Singh, J.

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

W.P.(C) 9971/2019 & CM APPL. 41318/2019

2. The Petitioner is a death row convict who is currently in the Nagpur Central Prison, Nagpur, Maharashtra. He has filed the present writ petition challenging the order of the Central Information Commission (hereinafter ‘CIC’) dated 13th June, 2019. The CIC in its decision had directed the Jail Superintendent, Nagpur Central Prison, to facilitate the downloading of copies of the documents sought by the Petitioner.

3. The Petitioner filed an RTI application dated 4th February, 2019 addressed to the Central Public Information Officers (hereinafter ‘CPIO’) Publication Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (hereinafter ‘MIB’) seeking hard copies of the following publications:

i. Courts of India (Compilation)

ii. Belief in ballot

iii. Why people protest (Del.)

iv. Right to Information

v. Citizen and Constitution

vi. Dist. Administration (theory and practice)

vii. My book of human rights

viii. National unity and integrity

ix. Local governance (A global perspective)

x. A history of socialism (Del.)”

4. The claim of the Petitioner is that he is below the poverty line being a death row convict and cannot afford the price of these books. He thus prays for the same to be given free of cost to him.

5. The publication division responded and stated that the same cannot be provided free of cost to the general public. However, if the Petitioner is interested, he could contact the sales emporium in Navi Mumbai to purchase the books online. This order was challenged by the Petitioner before the Petitioner before the First Appellate Authority under Section 19(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 which also held that there was no document to prove that the applicant is below the poverty line. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected. Thereafter, the CIC also disposed of the appeal with the following directions:

“9. In view of the above, the Commission finds that an appropriate reply has been furnished to the appellant by the respondent. However, in view of the appellant’s submission that he is in jail where he has no access to the internet, the Commission directs the Jail Superintendent, Nagpur Central Prison, Nagpur to facilitate downloading of copies of Acts/Rules as sought vide the appellant’s RTI application within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order under intimation to the Commission.”

6. Notice was issued in this writ petition on 16th September, 2019. A counter affidavit has been filed by the MIB to the following effect:

“i. THAT in its order, Hon’ble Chief Information Commissioner (CIC), Mr Sudhir Bhargava on 13.06.2019 finds that an appropriate reply has been furnished to the Petitioner by the Respondent. However, in view of the Petitioner's submission that he is in jail where he has no access to the internet, the Commission directed the Jail Superintendent, Nagpur Central Prison, Nagpur to facilitate downloading of copies of Acts/Rules as sought vide the Petitioner's RTI application within a period of four week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order under intimation to the Commission. With the above observations, the appeal was disposed-off.

j. THAT it may be seen therefore that the Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) has duly upheld the stand taken by the First Appellate Authority, Shri Rajiirder Chaudhary, Director (B).

k. THAT the Appellate Authority suggested the Nagpur Central Jail, keeping in view the circumstances of the prisoner, to take a broader view. Accordingly, the Respondent had requested the Superintendent, Nagpur Central Prison to purchase the books of Publications Division and issue the same to the Prisoner for facilitating his appeal. This stand was again duly appreciated and upheld by the Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) and vide the Para No.9. Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) has directed the Jail Superintendent to provide the copies of the Act as sought by the Pet