Justice Subramaniam Prasad reiterated this principle while dismissing the plea filed by Ehtesham Qutubuddin Siddiqui, a death row convict in the Mumbai twin blasts case, seeking travel details of a witness.
Siddiqui's request for information about a witness's travel from Mumbai to Hong Kong was rejected by the Central Information Commission (CIC) and the Bureau of Immigration, citing exemption under the RTI Act.
The CIC ruled that disclosing information to third parties falls under Section 8(1)(j) of the Act, which protects individual privacy.
Justice Prasad, while upholding the CIC's decision, said it was not unreasonable to withhold information from third parties. He said Siddiqui is ready to seek information through proper legal channels like Section 391 of CRP if it is not part of the criminal court record.
Siddiqui's request for information about a witness's travel from Mumbai to Hong Kong was rejected by the Central Information Commission (CIC) and the Bureau of Immigration, citing exemption under the RTI Act.
The CIC ruled that disclosing information to third parties falls under Section 8(1)(j) of the Act, which protects individual privacy.
Justice Prasad, while upholding the CIC's decision, said it was not unreasonable to withhold information from third parties. He said Siddiqui is ready to seek information through proper legal channels like Section 391 of CRP if it is not part of the criminal court record.
