Alleged ‘Dowry Death’ in Australia four years ago
Gaurav Vivek Bhatnagar
The Wire India
New Delhi, March 30, 2018
The Intelligence Bureau (IB) and the Bureau of Immigration have declined to answer the plea of a man who had sought the travel details of his son-in-law and another person claiming that they were crucial for the divorce case of his daughter, who he claimed was “severely tortured in Australia by his son-in-law for bringing insufficient dowry.”
The organisations have rejected the plea on the grounds that they are exempt from providing information which does not pertain to corruption or human rights violation on their part.
What RTI Activists say
However, Right to Information (RTI) activists insist that there is no clause in the Act which debars the IB or the Bureau of Immigration from disclosing such information if they feel someone’s human rights are at stake.
The plea was filed by P Selva Dhas in February 2014, and he had sought information regarding Suyambulingam and Chellappen Nagammal Suyambulingam’s stay in India since 2009. The appeal was marked to the office of Joint Deputy Director, IB; Airport Director, Airport Authority of India; and the PRO of Immigrations Department at Trivandrum International Airport.
Intelligence agencies claimed exemption under Section 24 of RTI Act.
Bureau’s response
In his response, the IB official stated that Bureau of Immigration and IB were exempted from providing any information or details on the subject.
When Dhas filed the first appeal, the First Appellate Authority stated that since “there is no involvement of corruption or human rights violation on the part of BOI/IB on the issue raised by appellant”, therefore “the information sought cannot be provided as BOI/IB is exempted from providing any information /details on the subject as per the provision of the RTI Act 2005.”
Dhas then approached the Central Information Commission (CIC).
In his order, CIC Yashovardhan Azad recorded the fact that the appellant stated that his daughter was married to Suyambulingam and soon after the marriage they had gone to Australia but had returned after six months.
Serious allegations
“He alleges that his daughter was severely tortured in Australia by his son-in-law for bringing insufficient dowry. He states to have registered a complaint in this regard u/s 498A/406/120B and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. A divorce petition is also stated to be pending in Nagercoil Court wherein his son-in-law is the petitioner,” Azad recorded in his order.
The man pleaded that information was crucial to daughter’s divorce case, prospects.
The order also recorded that Dhas alleged that “the said petition was not signed by his son-in-law as he was not present in India at the relevant period of time while the affidavit presented along with petition was signed. In this backdrop, the appellant sought information regarding the arrival and departure and period of stay of his son-in-law in India. He asserts that the aforesaid information was crucial to the divorce case and prospects of his daughter.”
Application transferred
While the recording of this submission of Dhas clearly indicated the importance of the information to him, Azad noted that “the representative from Trivandrum airport states that the records sought are not maintained with them and hence the RTI application was transferred to the Immigration Department. The representative from Immigration Department states that in view of the bar of Section 24 of the RTI Act, the information was denied to the appellant. It is further asserted that issue in hand neither violates human rights nor related to corruption and reiterates their stand.”
Consistent with law
In view of the stand taken by Immigration Department and IB, Azad noted that “the Commission finds that RTI application has been dealt with adequately and the reply of PIO is lawful. The travel details of an estranged spouse will be protected by Section 8(1)(j) also apart from the bar of Section 24 as pressed in service by the respondents.”
Incidentally, Section 8(1)(j) pertains to “information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has not relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information.”
Exercising Option
The IB and Bureau of Immigration had taken recourse to seeking exemption under Section 24 which states that provisions of the RTI Act 2005 will not apply on intelligence and security organisations, which also include Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), National Investigation Agency (NIA) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
However, former CIC and noted RTI activist Shailesh Gandhi noted that there is nothing in Section 24 which prevents any of these agencies from disclosing information.
“If they want to, they can provide the information. If they think it is a human rights violation they can do it. But the question is whether you think it is a human rights violation or just an allegation. So those would be the grey areas of such a demand and disclosure.”
Expert advice
Venkatesh Nayak of Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative also insisted that there is nothing which prevents these agencies from providing the information if they want to do it. “It is just that we can’t claim information from them other than those relating to corruption or human rights violation by them as a matter of right, but if they want to disclose some information there is nothing which prevents them from doing it. Also, there is no penalty for wrongful disclosure under the RTI Act,” he added.
Gaurav Vivek Bhatnagar is Deputy Editor of the ‘The Wire, India,’ and the above article appeared in its Web Edition on March 29, 2018. It has been reproduced here with the permission of Siddharth Varadarajan, one of its Founding Editors. Established in India on May 10, 2015, as an editorially and financially independent entity, ‘The Wire’ is committed to promoting the values of democracy and journalism.
*
Photo Caption:
Money and Jewellery are not ‘demanded,’ but ‘given
Photo Courtesy: Qpic Images/Alamy Stock Photo
