The appellant, a retired officer of FCI, filed an application to the CPIO on 10.2.2006 and 21.2.2006 seeking for inspection of two files relating to an investigation conducted against him in 1984 which resulted in filing of an FIR in 1986 and consequent filing of a charge sheet before CBI Special Court in Patna in the year 1988. The case is still pending. No reply was received from the CPIO and accordingly the appellant filed an appeal before the appellate authority on 25.3.2006. Interim information was given to the appellant that the matter was under consideration and finally by a decision dated 12th May, 2006, the appellate authority declined to furnish the information applying the provisions of Section 8(1)(h) of RTI Act. Aggrieved by this, the appellant has filed the present appeal stating that he is in need of the records to get the case pending in the court concluded at the earliest as he is already 73 years old. Comments were called for from the appellate authority wherein it is stated that on receipt of the application of the appellant, the matter was referred to CBI and without giving any advice whether to part with the information or not, the CBI has only stated that the case is pending in the court and is being posted for hearing from time to time. It is further stated that in case the appellant desires the documents, he can apply through the court which would decide whether the records can be given inspection to the appellant or not. In his rejoinder, the appellant has referred to Section 8(3) of the Act to contend that the records sought for by the appellant being more than 20 years old have to be disclosed by the public authority. DECISION: From the facts of this case, it is apparent that Section 8(1)(h) has no application in the present case, as investigation has already been completed and charge sheet has been filed. Even the CBI has not advised the CPIO not to disclose the information. Even otherwise, as rightly pointed out by the appellant, in terms of Section 8(3), since he is seeking inspection of the files which related to a period 20 years before the date of his application, CPIO cannot deny the information. Accordingly, I direct the CPIO to allow the appellant to take inspection of the two files that he has sought to inspect and also allow him take copies free of cost. Sd/- (Padma Balasubramanian) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy : ( L. C. Singhi ) Addl. Registrar Address of parties :
1. Shri K.C. Makkar, Asst. General Manager, Food Corporation of India, 16-20, Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi-110001.
2. Shri Shaukat Hussain, General Manager, FCI, New Delhi-1.
3. Shri M. N. Kohli, A-429 Defence Colony, New Delhi 110024.