High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Divorce Cannot Be Granted Merely on WhatsApp Chats: Bombay High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Decree Based on Unproved Electronic Evidence State Cannot Demand Settlement Amount Yet Withhold Legitimate Refund: Bombay High Court Strikes Down MVAT Settlement Order Surveyor’s Report Is Not Sacrosanct; Arbitral Award Ignoring Vital Evidence Is Perverse: Delhi High Court Sets Aside Insurance Arbitration Award When Victim Lives Under Exclusive Control Of Accused, Burden Shifts To Accused To Explain What Happened: Calcutta High Court Medical Evidence Clearly Indicating Suicide Cannot Be Overlooked, Prosecution Must Prove Homicidal Death Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Andhra Pradesh High Court 'Candidates Acted With Full Knowledge of Consequences': Kerala High Court Reverses Order for Refund of 10% Exit Fee in Medical PG Mop-Up Admissions Dispensing with Departmental Inquiry Without Material is Arbitrary: Supreme Court Sets Aside Dismissal of Delhi Police Constable Power Of Attorney Holder Authorized To Enforce Pre-Emption Right Can File Suit, Death Of Principal Does Not Bar Legal Heirs: Orissa High Court Government Servant Convicted In Criminal Case Can Be Dismissed Without Departmental Enquiry: Tripura High Court Upholds Teacher’s Dismissal RTI Cannot Be Used To Bypass Statutory Bar On Police Case Diaries: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Penalty Against Police Officers Externment Cannot Be Based On Police Report And Stale Cases: Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes District Magistrate’s Order Even Exonerated Accused Can Be Summoned During Trial: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Summoning Under Section 358 BNSS Benefit of Doubt Acquittal Not Equal to Honourable Acquittal: Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Police Constable Candidate Madras High Court Allows NEET-Failed Student To Appear In CBSE Class XII Mathematics Exam After Last-Minute Subject Switch By Parents Salary of Parents Cannot Be Used to Deny OBC Non-Creamy Layer Status in Absence of Post Equivalence: Supreme Court Father Who Rapes Minor Daughter Cannot Seek Leniency: Bombay High Court Upholds Life Imprisonment Construction Of Toilet Is Bare Necessity For Proper Use Of Premises, Expression "Own Use" Not Confined To Landlord's Personal Physical Use: Calcutta High Court 353 IPC | Conviction Cannot Rest On Uncorroborated Testimony Of Sole Witness When Other Evidence Contradicts Occurrence: Delhi High Court Upholds Acquittal 250 BNSS | 60-Day Discharge Period Is Procedural, Does Not Extinguish Accused's Right To Seek Discharge: Gujarat High Court Section 45 PMLA Cannot Become an Instrument of Endless Incarceration: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in ₹18 Crore Scholarship Scam Case Land Acquisition — Heirs Who Slept on Rights for 23 Years Cannot Claim Ignorance to Revive Dead Challenge: Karnataka High Court Institutional Hearing Is No Violation of Natural Justice: Kerala High Court Upholds BPCL’s Termination of Decades-Old Petroleum Dealership Witnesses Not Expected To Recount Past Incidents With Mathematical Precision, Minor Contradictions Don't Demolish Credibility: Orissa High Court If a Suit Is Ex Facie Barred by Limitation, the Court Has No Choice but to Dismiss It: P&H High Court

“Central Information Commission Upholds SBI’s Denial to Disclose Details of Due Diligence in Loan Sanctioning, Cites Fiduciary Relationship”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Central Information Commission (CIC) today upheld the decision of the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the State Bank of India, refusing to disclose details regarding who carried out due diligence in sanctioning a loan to M/s Priyadarshi Motors Pvt Ltd. The CIC, presided over by Information Commissioner Saroj Punhani, cited the fiduciary relationship as the primary ground for denying access to the said information.

In the landmark decision, the Commission observed, “The CPIO has appropriately denied the personal details who carried out due diligence of the above-said property for sanctioning of loan to M/s Priyadarshi Motors Pvt Ltd, which not only contains the elements of personal information of third party which stands exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act but also held/available in the bank under fiduciary capacity and thus, attracted exemption clause of Section 8(1)(e) of RTI Act.”

The Appellant, Rahul Kumar Singh, had approached the CIC after being dissatisfied with the responses of the CPIO and the First Appellate Authority (FAA). He argued that the denial of information led him to suffer financial losses as the property in question was leased by him to the firm M/s Priyadarshi Motors Pvt Ltd.

The Commission’s decision also referenced previous judgments of the Supreme Court, underlining the fiduciary relationship between the bank and its client. It drew attention to the clause of Section 8(1)(g) of the RTI Act which states that disclosing information could “endanger the life or physical safety of any person.”

Today’s ruling sets a precedent in matters of disclosing sensitive financial and personal information under the RTI Act and reiterates the protective boundaries laid down by law.

Date of Decision: 31/08/2023

RAHUL KUMAR SINGH vs State Bank Of India

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Rahul_Kumar_Vs_SBI_31_AUG_2023_CIC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News