In a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court has affirmed that personal information, such as passport details, cannot be disclosed to third parties under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005. The court emphasized that such disclosures fall within the exemptions outlined in Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, which pertains to personal information that has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause an unwarranted invasion of privacy.
Case Background
The case involved a petitioner, Rakesh Kumar, who sought information regarding the issuance of a passport and travel documents to a third party. His request was denied by the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), and subsequent appeals to the First Appellate Authority and the Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) were unsuccessful. The CIC had directed that the information be provided, subject to Kumar furnishing specific details to trace the records. However, the records in question, dating from 1984 to 1990, had been destroyed in accordance with government policy, rendering the information unavailable.
Court's Analysis
Justice Sachin Datta, presiding over the case, referred to previous judgments to underscore that personal identification documents are protected under the RTI Act's exemptions. The court noted that disclosing such information would constitute an unwarranted invasion of an individual's privacy and is not justified by any public interest. The judgment stated, "Disclosures which may be sought by a third party under the provisions of RTI Act pertaining to passport or any other personal identification document, squarely falls under the ambit of Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act."
Legal Precedents
The court's decision aligns with earlier rulings that have consistently held personal information as exempt from disclosure unless a larger public interest is demonstrated. For instance, in Union of India vs. R. Jayachandran, the Delhi High Court held that passport details, birth certificates, and educational records are personal information, the disclosure of which would cause an unwarranted invasion of privacy unless justified by an overriding public interest.
Implications of the Judgment
This ruling reinforces the protection of personal information under the RTI Act, emphasizing the need to balance transparency with individual privacy rights. It clarifies that while the RTI Act promotes transparency in public affairs, it also safeguards personal data from unwarranted disclosure. Public authorities are thus reminded to carefully assess RTI requests involving personal information, ensuring compliance with the exemptions provided under Section 8(1)(j).
Conclusion
The Delhi High Court's judgment underscores the importance of protecting personal information from disclosure under the RTI Act, reaffirming that such data is exempt unless a compelling public interest necessitates otherwise. This decision contributes to the ongoing discourse on the balance between transparency and privacy in the context of information access laws.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.