The information about his wife income tax documents probing for the alleged income and expenditure during the wedding was denied under RTI. However, as his wife has filed FIR under section 498A/406 IPC, Delhi High court allowed access to the document considering that as the criminal proceeding filed by the wife is still pending and her cross-examination is not complete, the husband can cross examine her with regard to her income-tax returns and/or the husband can file an appropriate application for production of the relevant income tax records.
The information sought by the Husband in reference to wife income tax documents regarding action taken report in reference to his letter was rejected on the ground that information sought is exempt under Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short ‘RTI Act, 2005’).
Central Information Commission came down heavily on RTI applicant for filing several frivolous and repeated applications with sole aim of harassing his wife without caring whether any public loss is being caused in the process. “he has misused RTI to run a parallel trial along with the trial in courts of law.”- CIC
More importantly, however, was the observation that the First Appellate Authority (FAA) disclosed information about his wife without applying the third party clause as under Section 8 (1) (j) that prohibits the private information not related to any public activity. Earlier also we have brought this issue on our blogs, you can read them here!
The RTI applicant has sought details of Notary Register of his wife. On the first appeal against the CPIO, Department of Legal Affairs, First Appellate Authority (FAA) gave the decision to disclose the information.The FAA noted that notary is the third party, but did not ask CPIO to follow the procedure to obtain views of the third party, Notary. Strangely the FAA has ignored the fact that it was not just the Notary, but the wife of appellant and owner of the house who leased are also third parties. Read more ›
RTI applicant wife filed complaints against the RTI applicant in not one but two police stations. The Puducherry police refused to give the copy of a complaint by the appellants wife and inquiry report, on grounds of physical safety, by invoking exemption under section 8(1) (g) of the RTI Act. Central Information Commission while hearing the case recorded that “as to how the physical danger to the wife’s safety is enhanced by the appellant knowing the contents of her complaint, since the substance of her charges is already known through the contents of the complaint filed in another police station made available to him through another RTI Application”. If you want to file RTI Online, do read our guide on how to file RTI online here!
Further, CIC observed that “Since the inquiry by Puducherry Police is over and the Complainant is signatory to the letter by the both parties for approaching the family court, due to which inquiry was closed- clearly strengthens his claim to get a copy of the documents. The inquiry is also not required in other cases.” Read more ›