Kerala High Court Seeks Clarity on RTI Exemption for Vigilance Investigations

Kochi, October 28 (Daily Kiran) : The Kerala High Court has called for clarification from the state government regarding the applicability of the Right to Information (RTI) Act exemptions for vigilance inquiries involving government officials. This request comes after the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) was granted exemptions under two sections, T1 and T2, as per a notification issued on October 22.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice V.M. Syam Kumar directed the government to submit an affidavit detailing the categories of information managed by these sections. The court noted that these sections handle sensitive data related to vigilance inquiries, intelligence inputs, search reports, and other related proceedings.

While acknowledging that some of this information may be sensitive, the court sought clarification on whether investigations against officials fall under these exemptions. The matter will be revisited in three weeks.

The public interest litigation (PIL) challenges the government’s decision to exempt these sections from the RTI provisions. The petitioner argues that the VACB is primarily a criminal investigation agency focused on corruption cases involving public servants. Therefore, it should not be classified as merely an administrative body through a notification.

Section 24(4) of the RTI Act allows state governments to exempt certain intelligence and security organizations through a notification in the official gazette. The petitioner pointed out that the VACB was not included in the list of eight organizations granted exemptions under a government order dated February 7, 2006.

The petition claims that, following the October 22 notification, the VACB’s information officers have been denying requests related to vigilance inquiries, preliminary verifications, closure reports, and prosecution approvals. It emphasizes that the RTI Act already provides provisions to protect sensitive information that could hinder investigations or endanger individuals.

The petitioner argues that fully exempting these sections could limit public oversight of the state’s anti-corruption machinery. During the hearing, the petitioner referenced a recent Supreme Court ruling in the case of “Special Police Establishment vs. Kamta Prasad Mishra and Others,” asserting that an agency investigating corruption cannot be automatically considered an intelligence or security organization under Section 24(4).

Furthermore, the petitioner highlighted a similar notification that the state government had rescinded in 2016 after facing legal challenges in the High Court. The current petition seeks to annul the October 22 notification and enforce the RTI Act for these sections, allowing access to information not covered by exemptions. The High Court has yet to rule on the validity of the notification.