New Delhi: Amid outrage over the interview of a December 16 gang-rape convict, CIC on Wednesday directed the Delhi Commission of Women to make public records of rapes committed in the national capital with stern conditions to ensure that identities of victims are not disclosed.
"The Commission observes that the records relating to rape victims cannot be totally blocked from sharing for research purposes on the ground of personal information under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
"When it is possible to separate information that can be given from that cannot be given, the PIO has to invoke doctrine of severability to facilitate the information," Information Commissioner Sridhar Acharyulu said.
The case relates to Baladevan Rangaraju who claimed that he wanted information on rape victims for research purpose and personally requested the Secretary of the Department, who after knowing the purpose, refused to furnish the records.
Rangaraju said information sought by him had to be maintained by the Department according to Delhi Commission for Women Act, 1994.
The Commission expressed concern over the issue of the protection of privacy of the rape victims and contended that it was not possible to separate the names of the victims from various documents including medico-legal case reports.
"Facilitate inspection of the records to the authorised female representative of the appellant with an assurance that they shall not bring any electronic device like video records, mobile, camera etc, block out the names and personal details of the victim and accused by whitener on the photostat copies," Sridhar said setting stern guidelines for disclosure of sensitive information.
He said each paper shall be verified by the officials of Delhi Women Commission to ensure that nowhere victims' names and private details are revealed before certifying.
"The appellant is directed to enter a non-disclosure agreement with an undertaking that he/his representative will not reveal information about the personal details of the victims and the accused and that they shall be responsible for any such revelation through the documents shared," he said.
Acharyulu warned that any such disclosure would not only result in the breach of undertaking but also an offence under the Indian Penal Code.
"It shall be responsibility of the respondent authority to secure records, and the appellant shall share the copy of the research report with the Women's Commission and this Commission," the Commissioner said in his order.
Read full judgment here
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Prof. M. Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar)
Information Commissioner
CIC/SA/A/2014/001250
Mr Baladevan Rangaraju v. PIO, Delhi Commission for Women, GNCTD
1. The appellant is present with Shri Siddharth Mohanty. The public authority is represented
by Shri Gautam Majumdar, Asstt Secy. Delhi Commission for Women and Shri Shubra Mendiratta,
Advocate.
Information sought:
2. Appellant through his RTI application sought for information in relation to the rape cases
referred to DCW without revealing their name or identity namely, Case identification, Educational
background of the victim, Thana where the case is registered, migrant status of the victim and
also sought for information maintained by DCW with regard to the accused.
PIO response:
3. PIO stated that the information sought cannot be furnished in view of Sec 2 (j) of the RTI act.
Ground for First Appeal:
4. Nonfurnishing
of information as per the RTI Act.
Ground For Second Appeal :
5. That the PIO be directed to furnish the information as per the RTI act
Proceedings Before the Commission:
6. Appellant submitted that he was seeking the information for the purpose of his research.
He stated that before filing the RTI application he had personally requested the secretary of the
department, who after knowing the purpose, refused to furnish. Appellant also stated that the
information sought had to be maintained by the department as per Delhi Commission for Women
Act, 1994. Though he assured not to reveal names of victims, he alleged that he was not given the
information.
7. Respondent officer submitted that the detail as maintained by them in a general form was
furnished to the appellant and stated that further information could not be provided as it would
involved infringing the right of privacy of the accused and the victim.
8. The officers from Respondent Authority expressed concern for privacy of victims and
contended that it was not possible to separate the names of victims from various documents
including MLC reports.
9. The Commission observes that the records relating to rape victims cannot be totally
blocked from sharing with for research purposes on the ground of personal information under
Section 8(1)(j). When it is possible to separate information that can be given from that cannot be
given, the PIO has to invoke doctrine of severability to facilitate the information.
10. The Commission finds that it is not proper on the part of appellant to seek analyzed and
categorized data from the respondent authority which amounts to creation of readymade research
information for his utility. It is for him to do that data analysis and he cannot throw that burden on
the respondents. He has to ensure safety of records, privacy and safeguard the information taken
from misuse.
Decision:
11. Having heard the submission and perused the records, the Commission directs the
respondent authority to facilitate inspection of the records to the authorized female representatives
of the appellant with an assurance that they shall not bring any electronic device like videorecorder,
mobile, camera etc, block out the names and personal details of the victim and accused
by whitener on the photostat copies. After that, each paper shall be verified by the respondent
authority to ensure nowhere victims name and private details are revealed before certifying. The
appellant is directed to enter a nondisclosure
agreement with an undertaking that he/his
representative will not reveal the information about the personal detail of the victims and the
accused and that they shall be responsible for any such revelation through the documents shared.
The appellant is made aware of the fact that any such disclosure of personal details of victims
would not only result in the breach of the undertaking but also an offence under Indian Penal
Code. It shall be the responsibility of the respondent authority to secure the records, and the
appellant shall share the copy of research report with the Women’s Commission and this
Commission. The commencement of inspection of the records for research subject to above
referred conditions shall commence within 10 days of receipt of this Order.
12. The commission Orders accordingly.
Sd/(
M. Sridhar Acharyulu)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy
(Babu Lal)
Deputy Registrar.
No comments:
Post a Comment