Mr. Rohit Kumar v. National Human Rights Commission

 http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/134120261/

 

Central Information Commission

Mr.Rohit Kumar vs National Human Rights Commission on 10 January, 2014

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. - 308, 2nd Floor, BhikajiCama Place, August KrantiBhawan, New Delhi - 110066. Website: cic.gov.in
File No. CIC/SS/C/2013/000475
Complainant : Mr. Rohit Kumar Room No. 1B-47, Law Boy's Hostel, Campus-16, KIIT School of Law,KIIT University,
Bhubaneshwar-751024, Orissa
Public Authority : National Human Right Commission FaridkotHouse,Copernicus Marg,
New Delhi-110001
Date of Hearing : 10.01.2014 Date of Decision : 10.01.2014 Presence:
Complainant : Absent
Respondents/ PIO : Shri Sunil Arora, Dy.Registrar, Shri J.K.Srivastava, Nodal Officer/PIO,
FACTS:
1. Vide RTI application dated 02/08/2013, Complainant has sought information in respect of an accused Munna Singh who died in the custody at Jamuyee Police Station, District Jamuyee in Bihar. The complainant further wanted to know the progress of his letter dt. 4.7.2013 addressed to National Human Rights Commission. In this context , he also wanted information as mentioned in para 1 to 5. (Para 7 wrongly mentioned) of his RTI Application referred to above.
2. PIO vide letter dated 3/09/2013 has informed the complainant that information sought is exempted under section 8(1) (h) of RTI Act, 2005.
3. Ground of the complaint filed on 23/09/2013 is mentioned in para 4 of the complaint.
4. The complainant is absent despite of our due notice. Mr. Bhattacharya, deemed CPIO made submissions on behalf of the respondents. As per Mr. Bhattacharya, the alleged custody death of the accused had occurred on 1-7-2013 at Jamuyee police station, District Jamuyee,in Bihar and Inquiry was started on 4th July, 2013. When Mr. Bhattacharya was further asked to mention the latest stage of the said Inquiry, he expressed his inability to mention the exact progress of the said Inquiry.
DECISION
It would be seen here that despite of our due notice to the complainant, he failed to appear either in person or through someone, duly authorized, to present his case before the Commission. I heard the submissions made by deemed CPIO of the department at length and also perused the contents of the complaint dt. 23-9-2013, RTI application Dt. 2-8-2013 .......2/-
-2-
and also perused other material made available to us. I am of considered view that the instant complaint dehors the ambit of S.18 of RTI Act, 2005, apart from non-pressed due to absence of the complainant. As such, the Commission feels that no useful purpose would be served to proceed further with the instant complaint. The complaint is hereby closed accordingly. (M.A.Khan Yusufi)
Information Commissioner
Copy of this Decision be given free of cost to the parties. Authenticated true copy
(Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar)
Joint Secretary & Additional Registrar 1) The CPIO
National Human Rights Commission,
Faridkot House, Copernicus Marg,
New Delhi­110001.
2) The Appellate Authority,
National Human Rights Commission,
Faridkot House, Copernicus Marg,
New Delhi­110001.
3) Shri Rohit Kumar,
Room No. 1B­47,
Law Boys'Hostel,
Campus­16, KIIT School of Law,
KIIT University,
BHUBANESWAR­751024