Kerala HC Questions Scope of RTI Exemption for VACB Sections
Kochi: The Kerala High Court on Wednesday sought a clear explanation from the state government on whether vigilance inquiries against government officials are included in the Right to Information exemption given to two sections of the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau.
The bench of Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice V.M. Shyam Kumar has ordered the government to file an affidavit. It should specify the categories of information dealt with by the T1 and T2 sections, which were exempted through a notification issued on October 22.
The court observed that these sections are responsible for vigilance inquiries, intelligence inputs, search reports and other information linked to vigilance proceedings. It also noted that some of this information could be sensitive. Even so, the court asked whether inquiries against officials are part of the exemption.
The matter has been posted for consideration after three weeks.
The PIL challenges the government's decision to place the two sections under the exemption.
The petitioner contends that the VACB is essentially a criminal investigation agency responsible for probing corruption among public servants. It cannot, the petitioner argues, be treated as an intelligence or security organisation simply because of an administrative notification.
Section 24(4) of the RTI Act empowers state governments to exempt certain intelligence and security organisations by issuing a notification in the Official Gazette. The petitioner noted that the VACB was not included among the eight organisations exempted under the government order of February 7, 2006.
The petition claims that VACB information officers are now refusing requests related to vigilance inquiries, preliminary verification, closure reports and sanction for prosecution, relying on the October 22 notification.
It further states that the RTI Act already protects sensitive material, including information whose disclosure could impede an investigation or endanger lives. Granting complete exemption to the two sections, the petitioner says, may limit public monitoring of the state's anti-corruption machinery.
During arguments, the petitioner referred to the Supreme Court's recent decision in Special Police Establishment v. Kamta Prasad Mishra and Others. It was submitted that a corruption-probing agency cannot automatically be regarded as an intelligence or security organisation under Section 24(4).
The petitioner also told the court that the state government had withdrawn a similar notification in 2016 when it was challenged before the High Court.
The petition seeks cancellation of the October 22 notification and continued application of the RTI Act to the two sections, so that information not exempted by law can be accessed. The High Court has not yet pronounced on the validity of the notification.