के(cid:7008)(cid:7076)ीय सूचना आयोग Central Information Commission बाबा गंगनाथ माग(cid:6981),मुिनरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई (cid:7408)द(cid:7016)ली, New Delhi – 110067 ि(cid:7367)तीय अपील सं(cid:6990)या / Second Appeal No. CIC/ALSOI/A/2024/647749 Rushab R Bhandari … अपीलकता(cid:6981)/Appellant VERSUS बनाम CPIO: Archaeological Survey of India (Ministry of Culture), …(cid:7079)ितवादीगण/Respondents Jaipur.

Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

RTI : 11.06.2024 FA : 08.07.2024 SA : 27.10.2024 CPIO : 05.07.2024 FAO : 30.07.2024 Hearing : 20.01.2026 Date of Decision: 20.01.2026 CORAM:

Hon’ble Commissioner Shri P R Ramesh O R D E R

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 11.06.2024 seeking information on the following points:

1. Permission letter given by Archaeology department Jaipur to Collector office of Baran Rajasthan to handover 3 Jain idols found in Village Narshimpura in Year 2019 which were under the custody of Police Thana of Mothpur to the Digambar Jain Temple of Baran.

2. Provision of Law under which the above said idols were handed over.

3. Archaeology report with regards to antiquity of Idols, period, style and sect i.e whether Shwetambar or Digambar.

4. Photographs taken by department of the three idols.

5. Documents submitted by the collector office Baran to department in this matter.

6. Legality of the handover of antique idols to private temples instead of keeping them in Museum.

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 05.07.2024 and the same is reproduced as under:-

“आपके ऑनलाइन आवेदन ॿमांक ALSOI/R/E/24/00609 िदनांक 11.06.2024 के संदभ१ म७ सूिचत करना है िक सूचना का अिधकार अिधिनयम, 2005 की धारा ४ (जी) के तहत वांिछत जानकारी उपल(cid:617) नहीं कराई जा सकती है।“

3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 08.07.2024 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 30.07.2024 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.

4. Aggrieved with the FAA’s order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 27.10.2024.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

Appellant: Not present Respondent: Dr. Govind Meena, Dy. Superintending Archaeologist.

5. The Respondent submitted that under the Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972 (AATA) and related rules, the Archaeological Survey of India holds primary authority over the management and preservation of antiquities (items over 100 years old). While the ASI is tasked with preventing theft and smuggling, there are legal channels and established practices for placing idols in temples, particularly if they are recovered or if ownership is established. The Respondent further contended that the information sought by the Appellant is sensitive in nature, and its disclosure could adversely affect religious sentiments and potentially endanger the safety of individuals concerned. Accordingly, the information sought is exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(g) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Decision:

7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing and perusal of records, observes that the Appellant has sought information related to handover of three Jain idols found in Village Narshimpura in the year 2019 which were under the custody of Police Thana of Mothpur to the Digambar Jain Temple of Baran. It is observed that under the Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972, an idol that is more than 100 years old is classified as an antiquity and falls under the regulatory control of the Archaeological Survey of India. Such an idol can be placed in a temple only after it is duly registered with the ASI under Section 14 of the Act and lawful ownership or custodianship is established. Any movement, transfer, or installation of the idol requires prior permission from the ASI, which assesses factors such as security, preservation, and public interest. While the Act does not prohibit religious worship of antiquities, their placement in t