Whispers Forum

The appellant sought information about the bank account of his late father, FDs, nominee, amount etc. The FAA directed the PIO to provide statement of account of certain bank accounts. Not having received any information in compliance of the FAA’s order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the Second Appeal. The PIO stated that he was not the then PIO and could not update regarding the compliance of FAA’s order. The CIC observed that the respondent has partly provided the information. The FAA had directed the PIO to provide the account statements, but the PIO has not complied with the directions of the FAA, so far. The CIC directed to provide the copies of account statement.
Comments
Non-compliance of the order of the FAA is grossly incorrect on the part of the PIO. In this case, the PIO has been lucky to escape penalty for which there appears no excuse.
Citation: Vishnudev Prasad Singh v. Union Bank of India, CIC/UBIND/A/2023/100809; Date of Decision: 30.04.2024
Dr Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is a RTI Consultant currently working with IIM Visakhapatnam. She has co-authored the books, RTI Right to Information - Law and Practice and PIO’s Guide to RTI. She offers consultancy on RTI matters and Third party audit. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation of India at the link www.rtifoundationofindia.com

The three new criminal laws: ‘Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita’, ‘Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita’ and ‘Bhartiya Sakshya Adhinium’, the reworded versions of existing fundamental criminal laws IPC, CrPC and the Indian Evidence Act (colonial legacy) as per gazette notification, will be effective from July 1, 2024. The prevailing three criminal laws have been in operation for over a century and have received interpretations from various courts including the Supreme Court. Some legal luminaries have, in a letter to the union law minister, have sought deferment of new laws beyond July 1.2024. Some logical questions arise in our minds. These merit careful consideration. These are : (a)Will the change-over reduce cost of litigation to the accused and save litigation time; (b) Will the new dispensation reduce the large backlog of pendency in the already overburdened judiciary, running into crores of cases; (c) More importantly, could the two systems of criminal justice(old and the new)operate concurrently.All pending cases, filed under old system, are at different stages of litigation (d)Could the substantive laws, IPC, India Evidence Act, be applied retrospectively; (e) The procedural laws could possibly be applied retrospectively, provided they impact the accused adversely. These are matters for legal scrutiny; (f) Could the accused live with a sense of certainty and security about their Right to life and liberty, not knowing which stream of law will govern them. Utter confusion, chaos. More litigation, more cost to the accused, more delay; (g) What will be the cost of infrastructure needed to upgrade the system of delivery of criminal justice? Has any thought been given to the above questions ; (h)Will the dichotomy, as stated above ,be able to stand the scrutiny in the Supreme court; (i)Some bright legal minds have already expressed concern about the haste in which the bills were passed in the last Parliament; (j) Could the gazette –notified new penal laws be referred to the new Parliament for further discussion, one wonders? Much will depend on the stand taken by the Supreme Court on the validity of new penal laws, the ruling political dispensation and the new Opposition. No litigant has ,so far, approached the Top court in the matter, possibly awaiting reaction of the Union of India.
A K Saxena (A former civil servant)

How the NDA Government should tackle corruption/ corrupt practices. Conducting General Elections at all India level or conducting all India level entrance examinations like NEET, etc. is a difficult task. The recent example of leak of papers of NEET is a blot on the part of the NDA Government. The opposition parties take advantage of such incidents and are holding the NDA Government responsible for this. After conducting such an entrance test, cancellation and re-test is a costly affair. Corrupt practices are still prevailing in India. To avoid such corrupt practices, all officers of the Ministry directly involved (right from Secretary of the Ministry to the ground level officials) should be held responsible. There should be a column in their annual confidential reports where the number of cases of leakage of test papers or corruption cases should be mentioned besides appropriate action against them, right from the ground level officials to the Secretary of the Ministry. Nowadays the higher officials go scot free when they fail in their responsibility to select appropriate officials to handle such exams. Government should rethink their punishment policy without which such incidents will take place again and again.
Pradeep

The Appellant filed an RTI application seeking certain information about payment by SEBI of the amount deposited by the Sahara India, progress of the case pending in the Supreme Court, Different schemes run by Sahara India etc. He filed a First Appeal alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. During the second appeal, the PIO informed that SEBI had submitted 22 status reports before the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court is primary holder of the information. However, the information regarding the process of refund and cut-off dates for the processing of the application have been provided to the appellant. The CIC held that PIO has provided an appropriate reply to the RTI Application as per the provisions of the Act.
Comments
The question as to who is the holder of information if a public authority has transferred some documents to another public authority has often been raised. In case of judiciary, the PIO often transfers the RTI application to the Registrar of the Court under section 6(3) of the RTI Act asking the registrar to directly provide the information to the applicant.
Citation: Mohan Sahu v. Security and Exchange Board of India, Second Appeal No. CIC/SEBIH/A/2023/100957; Date of Decision: 29.04.2024
Dr Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is a RTI Consultant currently working with IIM Visakhapatnam. She has co-authored the books, RTI Right to Information - Law and Practice and PIO’s Guide to RTI. She offers consultancy on RTI matters and Third party audit. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation of India at the link www.rtifoundationofindia.com

The mismanagement of NEET etc exam by NTA has been in news for some time. One of the reasons for this is the centralised operation from its office in NOIDA. It is impossible to have a close watch on various agencies, persons etc required for conduct of such exams throughout the country. NTA should open its regional offices ( at least eight) in other cities across India. The regional officer should be made responsible for finding proper place, persons etc. for conduct of exams. They should collect the answer sheets etc, in their region and send it to the Head Quarters for further processing. This may help in minimizing the chances of leakage etc. CBSE has done this and it is working well.
S Gopal