Disposed¶7

Manshu Bansal v. Central Information Commission & Ors.

Delhi HC4 Feb 2025W.P.(C)/1385/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

W.P.(C) 1385/2025; Manshu Bansal v. Central Information Commission & Ors.; Delhi HC; Sachin Datta J; 04.02.2025; RTI Act Section 7 proviso 48 hours life or liberty; FIR 459/24 PS Jagatpuri sections 420 406 IPC; second appeal Section 19 RTI Act; complaint Section 20 RTI Act; CIC; petition disposed; consideration within 4 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with a request to respondent no.1 (Chief Commissioner, CIC) to consider the petitioner's second appeal (Annexure-P-5) and the complaint under Section 20 of the RTI Act, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 4 weeks; petitioner to remove objections in the second appeal. ¶7

Manshu Bansal Vs Central Information Commission & Ors. — Cheating and Forgery | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶7

Issue for consideration

Non-supply of the information sought by RTI application (life-or-liberty category under the proviso to Section 7 of the RTI Act, requiring provision within 48 hours) in relation to FIR No. 459/24, with no response from the PIO (respondent no.1) and the First Appellate Authority (respondent no.2). +1 more

¶4

Ratio / Principle

After some hearing, the petition is disposed of with a request to respondent no.1 (Chief Commissioner, CIC) to consider the second appeal filed by the petitioner, appended as Annexure-P-5 to the petition.

¶6

Key takeaways

CM APPL. 6753/2025 allowed subject to all just exceptions and the application stands disposed of.¶1
Respondent no.1 is also requested to consider the complaint filed by the petitioner under Section 20 of the RTI Act.ratio¶6
Respondent no.1 to act as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 4 weeks; the petitioner undertakes to forthwith remove any objections that may be raised in the second appeal filed before respondent no.1.ratio¶6

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Sachin Datta, J.), order dated 04.02.2025 in W.P.(C) 1385/2025 — Manshu Bansal v. Central Information Commission & Ors. The petitioner, complainant in FIR No. 459/24 (sections 420 and 406 of IPC, P.S. Jagatpuri), filed an RTI application on 27.12.2024 invoking the proviso to Section 7 of the RTI Act, 2005 (information concerning life or liberty to be provided within 48 hours). The PIO (D.C.P Shahdara, respondent no.1) and the First Appellate Authority (D.C.P District Shahdara, respondent no.2) gave no response, leading to a second appeal under Section 19 of the RTI Act before the CIC and a complaint under Section 20 of the RTI Act dated 21.01.2025 before the Chief Commissioner, CIC, both pending. After allowing CM APPL. 6753/2025, the Court disposed of the petition, requesting respondent no.1 to consider the second appeal (Annexure-P-5) and the Section 20 complaint expeditiously, preferably within 4 weeks; the petitioner undertook to remove objections in the second appeal.

¶1

$~80

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 1385/2025

¶4

MANSHU BANSAL ....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Advocate (appearance not given).

¶6

versus

¶7

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION & ORS.

.....Respondents

Through: None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

¶12

O R D E R % 04.02.2025

¶13

CM APPL. 6753/2025

¶14

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶15

Application stands disposed of.

¶16

W.P.(C) 1385/2025

¶17

The petitioner is the complainant in an FIR bearing no. 459/24 under sections 420 and 406 of IPC registered at the Police Station, Jagatpuri. An application under the Right to Information (RTI) was filed by the petitioner on 27.12.2024, seeking certain information in relation to the aforesaid FIR, by invoking the proviso to Section 7 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter ‘ the RTI Act ’) which contemplates that “ where the information sought for concerns the life or liberty of a person, the same shall be provided within 48 hours of the receipt of the request ”.

¶18

The requisite information having not been provided by the Public Information Officer D.C.P Shahdara, Delhi Police, Bhola Nath Nagar

¶19

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/02/2025 at 15:14:28

¶20

Shahdara, Delhi (respondent no.1), the petitioner preferred a first appeal before the First Appellate Authority i.e., Deputy Commissioner of Police, District Shahdara, Delhi Police, Bhola Nath Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi(respondent no.2) . Again, due to no response being received from the first appellate authority, the petitioner filed a second appeal before Central Information Commission (CIC) under Section 19 of the RTI Act.

¶21

The petitioner further submits that a complaint under Section 20 of the RTI Act was also submitted by the petitioner before the Chief Commissioner, CIC (respondent no.1) vide communication dated 21.01.2025 against the respondent no(s). 2 and 3, which is also pending consideration before the respondent no.1. 6. After some hearing, the present petition is disposed of with a request to the respondent no.1 to consider the second appeal filed by the petitioner (appended as Annexure-P-5 to the present petition) and also the complaint filed by the petitioner under Section 20 of the RTI Act. Let the same be done by the respondent no.1 as expeditiously as possible, preferable within a period of 4 weeks from today. The petitioner undertakes to forthwith remove any objection/s that may be raised in the second appeal stated to have been filed before the respondent no.1.

¶22

The petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

¶23

SACHIN DATTA, J

¶24

FEBRUARY 4, 2025/ at

¶25

This is a digitally signed order.

¶26

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/02/2025 at 15:14:28

Manshu Bansal v. Central Information Commission & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manshu Bansal v. Central Information Commission & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Dhupar Vs Union of India through Union Minister & Ors.

Bihar Olympic Association Vs President Indian Olympic Association & Anr.

Indian Speech Language and Hearing Association Vs Union of India & Ors.

Prem Prakash Shokeen Vs Election Commision of India & Anr.

Vikas Swami Vs Union of India & Ors.

Sudha Dhawan Vs Delhi Development Authority

The Film and Television Producers Guild of India Limited Vs Competition Commission of India

Amit Kumar Vs the Commissioner of Customs

Anil Dhupar Vs Union of India through Union Minister & Ors.

Bihar Olympic Association Vs President Indian Olympic Association & Anr.

Indian Speech Language and Hearing Association Vs Union of India & Ors.

Bal Kishan Sharma Vs Union of India & Ors.

Uttar Pradesh State Rifle Association Vs Union of India & Ors.

Sh. Munshi Ram Vs Consolidation Officer (Village Singhola) & Ors.