Dated 03-10-2007

Name of the Complainant:
Sri Bapan Ch. Das
C/o. Sri Ajit Ch. Das, Vill. Bagana No.1
P.O. Bangaon, Barpeta, 781375.

Name of the Public Authority:
SSP City, Guwahati.

The following were present:
1. Shri Surendra Kumar, IPS SSP City
2. Shri. B.M. Rajkhowa, ASP (HQ)
3. Shri Bapan Ch. Das

Brief of the case
On 1.8.07 an appeal was received from Shri Bipin Chandra Das in which he alleged that he sought for some information from the SSP City Guwahati. He stated that he received some information from the SSP City but was not satisfied with the reply. Then he submitted an appeal before the DIG (CWR), Guwahati on 2.8.07 as he is the First Appellate Authority. The DIG (CWR) directed the SSP City to provide the information as sought for by the petitioner under the RTI Act, 2005. However, the DIG (CWR), Assam directed the SSP City to ensure that the information was provided in consonance with section 8 of the RTI Act, 2005. On receipt of the direction of the DIG (CWR) the SSP City furnished the additional information in response to his (petitioner) letter dated 1.8.07. Not being satisfied with the additional information furnished to him he approached the Commission with a second appeal. The information sought for by him were as follows:

1. While depositing his motor cycle to Geetanagar Police Station his wife did not submit any written FIR. What proof did she give to the Police Station that she was his wife?

2. What was the G.D. Entry No. for the receipt of the motor cycle in Geetanagar Police Station? At which place did he leave his motor cycle while fleeing, if the motor cycle was left in Geetanagar Police Station area?

3. As a Police Case No 08/06 under section 498(A)/349 IPC was registered in All Women Police Station, on the basis of what information was the criminal case registered?

4. While making arrest by All Women Police Station Case No. 08/06 what were the things deposited by him in the thana?

5. He wanted the prescription of the MMC Hospital for medical checkup of his wife on 12.5.06 with registration no. 8682.

6. Where was his motor cycle and what happened to his motor cycle?

7. He wanted a copy of the petition registered on 15.9.06 being No 3539. Why did the O.C. Chandmari Police Station misplaced the petition? Why did the SSP City send the original petition to DSP Chandmari Division. He sent two reminders on 26.10.06 one to SSP City and the other to Shri Bedanta Rajkhowa, Additional SP and no action was taken on these letters.

The additional information as sought for by him vide his petition dated 1.8.07 were as follows:

1. As his wife deposited his motor cycle at Geetanagar Police Station from where did his wife take the motor cycle? What proof was given to the Geetanagar Police Station that she was his wife and what proof was given that the motor cycle belonged to her husband? Up to the date of depositing the motor cycle with the Geetanagar Police Station no registration number was given. How could the Geetanagar Police Station take the risk of taking deposit of his motor cycle which was not given any registration no.

2. Which police station wanted to arrest him when he tried to avoid arrest and fled away and on which date? The O.C. All Women Police Station arrested him and a copy of the ejahar might be furnished to him. Whether the O.C. All Women. Police Station enquired that the allegation brought out in the FIR were correct and who were the witnesses?

3. On which date the D.C. All Assam Women Police Station arrested him and what things were recovered from him? Also that he received his motor cycle what proof did the police station have? He also wanted a copy of the prescription No. 8682 dated 12.5.06 in OPD register of the MMC Hospital, Panbazar.

Submission of the Parties
The appellant reiterated the statements made in the written petitions submitted before the Commission and before the DIG (CWR) and the SSP City, Guwahati. He stated that the information submitted by the SSP, City was completely wrong. He also did not receive a copy of the FIR as sought for by him relating to All Women Police Station case No 08/06.

The SSP, City submitted that in reply to the complaint vide his letter dated 31. 7.07 of his office it was clearly stated that on 24.5.06 at about 6 P.M. Smt Kabita Talukdar Das produced one red TVS motor cycle at Geetanagar Police Station stating that the motor cycle belonged to her husband Shri Bipin Ch. Das (Appellant). She informed that he was the accused of a criminal case pending at All Women Police Station, Panbazar and was avoiding arrest. She stated that on 24.5.06 her husband abandoned the motor cycle and fled away to evade police. Smt Kabita Talukdar Das did not give any written complaint at Geetanagar Police Station and later on when the appellant appeared at Geetanagar Police Station to claim the motor cycle the O.C. Geetanagar Police Station informed the Women Police station about the presence of the appellant in his police station and asked to take necessary action which might be pending against him. The OC arrested the appellant in connection with All Women Police Station case No 08/2006 under section 498(A)/34 IPC. Smt Kabita Talukdar Das however did not submit any written complaint at the Geetanagar Police Station as claimed by the appellant.

Regarding sending of the complaint to the DSP, Chandmari Division, the SSP City submitted that it was sent to the DSP Chandmari to take action. The DSP, Chandmari Division further sent it to O.C. Chandmari P.S. to take necessary action. But the O.C. Chandmari Police Station misplaced the letter and hence no action could be initiated. Again on 6.9.97 he informed the appellant that Smt Kabita Talukdar Das introduced herself to be the wife of the appellant and deposited a motor cycle stating that her husband had abandoned the motor cycle. There was no question of any risk involved in keeping an unregistered vehicle in the Police Station since it was handed over by Mrs. Kabita Talukdar Das stating that the motor cycle belonged to her husband. Although Mrs. Kabita Talukdar Das did not produce any documentary proof of her identity but subsequent verification proved that whatever she told in the Police Station was true.

The SSP city further submitted that as the All Women Police Station was looking for him for executing arrest and on receipt of the information that he was present in the Geetanagar Police Station on 24.5. 06, the All Women Police Station arrested him on 25.5.06 and then forwarded to judicial custody. Further the SSP City informed that the Motor cycle was handed over to the appellant by the Geetanagar police Station on 22.6.06 vide G.D. entry no 620. When the appellant enquired whether his wife submitted a written complaint before the Geetanagar Police Station while depositing motor cycle, the SSP City informed the Commission that no written complaint was made in the Geetanagar Police Station by his wife and the motor cycle was received by the Police Station on verbal complaint of Smt Kabita Talukdar Das. When the appellant pointed out that he did not receive a copy of the FIR, the SSP city handed over a copy of the FIR in presence of the Commission then and there. The SSP city informed that the Women Police Station had submitted chargesheet and the case was pending in the Court.

Observation of the Commission
i) The Commission observed that except the copy of the FIR and the prescription as sought for by the appellant all other information were furnished to the appellant by the SSP City, Guwahati. The SSP, City Guwahati advised the appellant to obtain a copy of the prescription from the MMC Hospital authorities in view of the fact that the case diary had already been submitted to the Court with which the original copy of the prescription was sent. As such the Commission did not find that any information was withheld for information from the appellant.

ii) The Commission was informed by the appellant that the DIG, CWR Assam heard him and passed an order on his appeal dated 16.8.07 which was communicated to him on 17.8.07.

iii) The Commission observed that there was a lapse on the part of the O.C. Chandmari Police Station in misplacing the complaint of the petitioner which was reportedly sent to him by the DSP Chandmari Division. When asked the SSP City informed the Commission that no enquiry was held how the complaint of the appellant sent by the DSP, Chandmari Div to O.C. Chandmari P.S was missing from the Police Station.

iv) The DIG, CWR, Guwahati who heard the appellant on his first appeal, directed the SSP, City, Guwahati to furnish the information in consonance with Sec. (8) of the RTI Act, 2.005. The Commission would like to make it clear that the Sec.(8) is no at all applicable in the matter of the information requested by the appellant in this case. As the First Appellate Authority under Sec. 19(1) it was his responsibility to furnish the information as he deemed appropriate instead of sending it back to the SSP, City, Guwahati who had furnished the initial information.

Decision of the Commission
i) The Commission on careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and in exercise of the powers under Sec. 19(8) (a) of the RTI Act decided to direct the SSP city to cause an enquiry into the entire matter of misplacing of the complaint of the appellant by the O.C. Chandmari Police Station and fix responsibility on the officers / officials for the same and inform the Commission by 2.11.2007.

ii) As observed herein the First Appellate Authority under Sec. 19(1) of the Act did not seem familiar with the provisions of the RTI Act and it may be the case with all other Appellate Authorities/SPIOs in the department. In the interest of the implementation of RTI Act, the Director General of Police, Assam should give them training so that they can function correctly in accordance with the provisions of the Act

iii) As all the information wanted by the appellant had been furnished no other direction was deemed necessary.

iv) The Secretary of the Commission will send a copy of this order to the Director General of Police, Assam for compliance with the decision of the Commission at para (II) above.

Sd/- (R.S. Mooshahary)
Chief Information Commissioner, Assam
Janata Bhawan, Dispur.


Sd/ (Dr. B K Gohain)
State Information Commissioner, Assam
Janata Bhawan, Dispur.


Authenticated true copy

(Jiauddin Ahmed)
Secretary, State Information Commission, Assam
Janata Bhawan, Dispur.

CC:
1. The Director General of Police, Assam, Ulubari, Guwahati.
2. The SSP Guwahati City, Guwahati
3. Shri RM. Rajkhowa, ASP, (HQ), Assam
4. Sri Bapan Ch. Das, C/O. Ajit Ch. Das, Vill Bagana No.1, Bongaon, Barpeta, Assam
5. The DIPR, Dispur, Assam
6. MD, AMTRON, Bamunimaidan.
7. Office file.


Secretary
State Information Commission, Assam