Order XLI Rule 23A CPC | Re-Trial Necessary When Crucial Parties Impleaded In Appeal: Telangana High Court Cannot Freeze Entire Bank Account For Small Disputed Sums: Rajasthan High Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Against Indiscriminate Account Freezes In Cyber Crime Probes 187(3) BNSS | No Extension Of Investigation Time Without Notice To Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail In NDPS Case Road Widening Under Master Plan Cannot Be Stalled For Formal Land Acquisition, Section 305 Permits Direct Removal Of Encroachments: Madhya Pradesh High Court P&H High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Over 45-Day Delay In Informing Detenu Of Right To Represent 'Sole Allegation Of Torture Cannot Stand Alone': Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Husband Under Section 498A IPC After Dowry Demand Disproved Seeking Corroboration To Victim's Testimony Amounts To Adding Insult To Injury: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Offences Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust Cannot Coexist On Same Facts: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR Over Commercial Contract Dispute "Accident Alone Is Not Proof": Delhi High Court Acquits Bus Driver In 2003 Road Fatality Case, Rules Mere Speeding Or Collision Insufficient For Section 304A IPC Mandate Of Regulations Must Be Read Into Public Notices: Kerala High Court Reverses Order Directing NMC To Reopen Portal For Medical College's PG Seat Hike Unproven 1946 Oral Sale And Subsequent School Gift Cannot Convey Valid Title Over Tribal Land: Orissa High Court Orders Compensation After 80 Years ED Can Probe Money Laundering In J&K Corruption Cases: J&K High Court Rules S. 5(1)(d) J&K PC Act Corresponds To Amended S. 7 Of Central PC Act Not Mere Lip Service: Supreme Court Quashes GST Notice Under Section 74 Lacking Foundational Facts Of Fraud Or Suppression Selling Manufactured Goods At Factory Premises Doesn't Turn 'Industrial' Land Into 'Commercial' For Stamp Duty: Supreme Court Supreme Court Orders All States To Form Dedicated SITs To Probe Fake Motor Accident Claims, Warns Insurance Top Brass Against Selective Referrals Port Trusts Not Immune From Customs Duty On Pilfered Goods: Supreme Court Upholds Notification Declaring Mumbai Port Trust As Custodian Under Section 45

“Central Information Commission Dismisses RTI Complaint Seeking Mortgage Details, Cites ‘Interrogative Nature’ and ‘Personal Information’ as Grounds”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


 The Central Information Commission (CIC) has dismissed an RTI complaint filed by Go Neelahram against the State Bank of India (SBI), stating that the queries were “interrogative in nature” and contained “elements of personal information of a third-party borrower.”

In a detailed judgment, Information Commissioner Saroj Punhani observed, “The information sought by the Complainant is interrogative in nature which does not strictly conform to Section 2(f) of the RTI Act per se.” The Commission also noted that the queries contained elements that are protected under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, which pertains to personal information.

The complaint originated from an RTI application filed by Go Neelahram, seeking details about mortgage deeds, land ownership changes, and loan transactions between D. Krishnamoorthy and SBI. The CPIO had initially denied the information, citing that it was third-party information and exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(e) and 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.

Backing the CPIO’s decision, the Commission referred to several Supreme Court judgments, including CBSE vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors. And Khanapuram Gandaiah vs Administrative Officer & Ors., to emphasize that the RTI Act does not require public authorities to furnish information that requires drawing inferences or making assumptions.

The Commission also found “no malafide intent” on the part of the CPIO in denying the information and stated, “No further action is required in the matter.”

The judgment has been met with mixed reactions, with some legal experts stating that it upholds the sanctity of personal information, while others argue that it could set a precedent limiting the scope of the RTI Act.

The complaint has been disposed of accordingly, and the CPIO has been directed to share a copy of his latest written submissions with the Complainant.

Go Neelahram  vs STATE BANK OF INDIA, RBO 2

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Go_Neelahram_vs_State_Bank_Of_India_on_1_September_2023_CIC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News