PAVIT SINGH Vs. CENTRAL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant petition is for the following reliefs:-

(2.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner points out from the status report dtd. 9/5/2022 filed by the Central Bureau of Investigatin ('CBI') that the CBI had sent a Self-Contained Note to the Commissioner of Police, Delhi Police dtd. 16/10/2019 for taking action against the petitioner and his father on the ground that the allegations of blackmailing against them were substantiated by the recorded statements of seven property owners/occupants. The petitioner, thus, contends that the petitioner is entitled for the recorded statement or atleast names of purported seven property owners/occupants.

(3.) The information was denied by the Public Information Officer ('PIO') and the First Appeallate Authority. The Petitioner unsuccessfully challenged the order before the Second Appeallate authorities. Paragraph No.8 of the order dtd. 28/7/2025 passed by the Second Appeallate authoritiy, Central Information Commission ('CIC') is extracted as under:-