Khushi Bajpai
Published on: 23rd August 2022 at 17:39 IST
The Kerala High Court recently ruled that requests for copies of the “A” diary of civil and criminal postings cases are ineligible under the RTI Act since they relate to judicial processes.
According to Justice Murali Purushothaman, requests under the pertinent Rules of Practice, but not the RTI Act may be made to get copies of the A-diary in criminal and civil cases.
“These provisions governing requests for copies under the Subordinate Courts’ Rules of Practice are nearly identical to Rules 128 and 129 of the High Court of Kerala’s 1971 Rules, which were created in accordance with Article 225 of the Indian Constitution. The petitioner may get copies of “A” diary of civil and criminal postings in the cases by submitting requests in accordance with the applicable Rules of Practice,” the judgement noted.
An advocate named MP Chothy, a retired Class I officer who is currently engaged in legal practise, filed the petition that led to the ruling.
Before the Public Information Officer, Chothy had submitted a request for information under the RTI Act (PIO). Copies of the “A” diary of civil and criminal postings of the cases for the time period of December 2021 to April 2022 are being requested by the District Court of Ernakulam.
The PIO, however, rejected the application, citing that the information could be accessed by submitting a copy application and that it was also available on the District Court’s kiosk, notice board, and website.
The “A” diary is a part of court proceedings, so the matter was brought to the attention of the relevant judge. The application was rejected on the grounds that it is not possible to give such information in accordance with Sections 2.8(V), 3(a), and 8B (sic) of the RTI Act, the petitioner was further informed.
After that, the petitioner went to the appellate authorities to ask for the same relief.
The High Court has instructed all subordinate courts in the State that no information relating to any judicial proceedings shall be disclosed under the RTI Act, according to Rule 12 of the Right to Information (Subordinate Courts and Tribunals) Rules, 2006. The Appellate Authority also rejected the appeal on this basis.
The petitioner petitioned the High Court after being enraged by the PIO’s judgement and the Appellate Authority’s ruling. Further it was also requested that to quash Rule 12 of the Rules, arguing that it violates both the RTI Act’s requirements and a basic right granted by Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution.
The Court determined that the copies of “A” diaries of civil and criminal postings in the cases requested by the petitioner relate to judicial proceedings and that such an application for information cannot be entertained under the Rules.
In the case of Chief Information Commissioner v. High Court of Gujarat and another, the Apex Court ruled that when the High Court’s rules provide a method for obtaining information, that mechanism should be kept and used instead of turning to the RTI Act’s provisions.
The provisions of the RTI Act shall not be used since the petitioner can access copies of “A” diary of civil and criminal postings in the cases by submitting requests in accordance with the Rules of Practice.