JUDGMENT :

BIREN VAISHNAV, J.

1. The petitioner by way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeks publication of Rules framed by the respondents under Section 33 of the Gujarat Police Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as “the Police Act”). The petitioner further seeks publication and online access to all the Rules, Regulations, Instructions, Manuals and Records held by the respondent No. 1 or under its control or used by its employees for discharging its functions. It is the case of the petitioner that failure to publish such rules amounts to illegality of the executive action violation of democracy rule of law and natural justice and infringement of rights of the petitioner of free speech and expression and assembly enshrined in Article 19 of the Constitution and Right to Life enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution.

2. Facts in brief are as under:

2.1 On 12.12.2019, the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019, was assented to by the President and published for general information in the official gazette. Some of the residents of Ahmedabad willing to express their opinion on this amendment, wished to express the same in peaceful manner. The petitioner, wanting to peacefully assemble sought permission for assembly and peaceful protest on 29.12.2019 between 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. on foot-path of road adjacent to Kanoria Centre for Arts and Gufa of Ahmedabad. The information was sought from the Police Inspector, Gujarat University Police Station, vide letter dated 25.12.2019. On 28.12.2019, vide “Samaj Yadi” the petitioner was informed that the permission for such assembly and peaceful protest is not allowed and is rejected on the grounds of situation of law and order as well as problem of traffic. The petitioner in violation of the order did hold an assembly and was detained for a few hours.

2.2 With a view to know the Rules under which the permission of the petitioner was processed, the petitioner addressed a letter to the respondent No. 1, Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad, asking for the copy of the complete rules framed under Section 33 (1) (o) of the Police Act and secondly if a request was rejected, whether it was so done under any of the rules or regulations. On 06.03.2020, the petitioner received a reply that her request for information sought is refused. The refusal of information and the action of the respondent No. 1 in doing so is challenged on the ground of it being grossly bad, illegal, violative of principles of natural justice, Rule of Law and Democracy.

3. Mr. B.S. Soparkar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit as under:

3.1 Section 33(1) of the Gujarat Police Act, according to the learned counsel empowers the respondent Commissioner under the area which is in their respective charge to make, alter or rescind rules. Clause (o) of the section empowers such officer to make rules regulating the conduct of and behaviour or action of persons constituting assemblies and processions on or along the streets prescribing in the case of processions the rules by which the order in which and the times at which the same may pass. Such rules are framed subject to the provisions of Section 33(6) of the Police Act which provides that such rule made be published in the official gazette and in the locality affected thereby.

3.2 Reading Section 4(1)(b) of the Right to Information Act, Mr. Soparkar, learned counsel, would submit that this provision casts an obligation on the public authority to proactively publish 17 kinds of information including the procedure followed in the decision making process, the norms set by it for discharge of its functions and the rules and regulations under control or used by its employees for discharging its functions. He would therefore submit that not publishing and proactively disclosing the rules and orders framed under Section 33(1) of the Police Act are in violation of Section 33(6) of the Police Act as well as Section 4 of the Right to Information Act.

3.3 If the