IMPORTANT POINT
The RTI Act applies to the CBI, and the proviso to Section 24 allows for the disclosure of information pertaining to allegations of corruption and human rights violations. The CBI must establish the sensitivity of information sought in appropriate cases.

JUDGMENT

1. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has approached this Court challenging an Order dated 25.11.2019 passed by the Central Information Commission (CIC) allowing an appeal filed by the Respondent herein and directing the CPIO, Central Bureau of Investigation, Anti-Corruption Branch, Delhi to give the following information as sought by the Petitioner:

"I. Kindly provide me certified copy of all the file noting/documents/correspondences related to investigation done by CBI on corruption complaint dated 03.07.2014, bearing No. F.17/NVC/2014(356), marked to Sh. Nitish Mishra, SP(CBI), from the then CVO of AIIMS, New Delhi, regarding corruption in purchase in trauma centre, AIIMS, New Delhi.

Kindly provide me certified copies related to efforts made by CBI to locate Annexure-II of said complaint and statements if any, taken from Sh. T R Mahajan, Assistant Store Officer, regarding supplier firm owned by his son and daughter-in-law.

II. Kindly provide me codified copy of all the file noting/documents/correspondences related to investigation done by CBI in PE -DAI-2014-A-0004, registered by ACB, New Delhi, in January, 2014, naming Mr. Vineet Chaudhary and Mr. B S Anand, including the documents related to investigation done by CBI into transaction of their properties, as mentioned in the said P.E.

III. Kindly provide me certified copy of all the file noting/documents/correspondences into investigation done by CBI into corruption complaint dated 19.05.2014, received from Vigilance Cell of AIIMS, New Delhi regarding corruption in surgery department of AIIMS, New Delhi and about which a half-baked report was sent by CBI to Union Health Ministry on 17.12.2014.

IV. Kindly provide me certified copy of all the file noting/documents/correspondences on complaint dated 22.01.2016 addressed to Sh. Anil Sinha, IPS, the then Director(CBI) on Subject-complaint against shoddy investigation by CBI in CO-79/2014/ACP/DL1/12500; CO/DLI/ACP/Complaint/2014/48/16776;P-DAI-2014-A-0004, ACP, Delhi."

2. Material on record indicates that the Respondent in his capacity as a Chief Vigilance Officer (CVO) at AIIMS had sent a report regarding corrupt practices in the purchase of fogging solution and disinfectant for the Medical Store, JPNA Trauma Centre, AIIMS. According to the Respondent, no action has been taken by the CBI on the information which was given by the Respondent, and, therefore, the Respondent had approached the CPIO, CBI. The said information was denied on the ground that the CBI is an organization which is specified in the Second Schedule to the RTI Act read with Section 24 of the Act, and, therefore, the RTI Act does not apply to the Petitioner/Organization. The Petitioner thereafter filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority and the Appellate Authority also rejected the appeal of the Respondent on the very same ground which led to the Second Appeal. Before the Central Information Commission (CIC), the Respondent therein being the Petitioner in the present writ petition stated that the investigation in the matter was already completed and the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare shared the relevant information of the case with the Respondent.

3. The Petitioner herein, who is the Respondent before the CIC, raised the plea that since the name of the CBI figures in the Second Schedule to the RTI Act, the provisions of the RTI Act are not applicable to the CBI.

4. The CIC placed reliance on the judgment dated 23.08.2017 passed by this Court in CPIO, Intelligence Bureau v. Sanjiv Chaturvedi, W.P.(C) 5521/2016, wherein a Coordinate Bench of this Court had held that the proviso to Section 24 of the RTI Act permits information pertaining to allegations of corruption and human rights violations be supplied to a person seeking information on these grounds and that there is no blanket ban on disclosing such information.

5. It is contended by the Petitioner that Section 24 of the RTI Act acts as a complete bar and CBI is exempt from the provisions