In an Alleged Rs55 Crore Fraud by Punjab & Sind Bank, CIC Directs CPIO To Justify RTI Exemptions
The central information commission (CIC), last week on 4th September, adjourned an RTI appeal concerning the alleged Rs55 crore fraud at Punjab & Sind Bank’s DU Khalsa College branch, after observing that its central public information officer (CPIO) failed to provide a credible justification for denying information, under the RTI Act. Also, it gave an interim decision as the matter is in the Delhi High Court (HC) with a note that the matter should be re-examined by CIC.
 
RTI applicant, Chayan Ghosh Chowdhury sought the following information under Section 4 of the RTI Act, regarding a fraud of Rs55 crore, allegedly perpetrated by the employees of Punjab & Sind Bank in DU Khalsa College branch (D0895) under Delhi-II zone. He sought inspection of files of the following documents:
  • Report of the staff accountability committee, constituted in terms of the staff accountability policy 2022-25, in the matter of the above-said fraud. 
  • Name, rank and designation of the officials who were part of the accountability committee in the matter of the above-said fraud. 
  • Name and rank of the fact-finding official (FFO) appointed for the purpose and report of the fact-finding official (FFO), in the matter of the above-said fraud 
  • Name of the CVO and a copy of the report submitted by the CVO, in the matter of the above-said fraud.
  • Name, rank and designation of officials held responsible for this fraud and details of action taken against each official may kindly be provided.
 
Pramod Saxena, chief manager and the CPIO, replied that he is unable to provide information under exemptions under Section 8(1)(g) and Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, 2005, contending that the information sought could not be disclosed. Also, the information cannot be disseminated as the matter is sub-judice and under investigation by the CBI and “disclosure would impede the investigation.” He submitted that the following sub-sections of section 8 state:
  • Section 8(1)(h): Information could not be shared as the matter was under investigation by the central bureau of investigation (CBI), and disclosure could impede the probe.
  • Section 8(1)(g): Disclosure of names and reports could endanger officials or compromise their confidentiality. 
 
Since Mr Chowdhury’s first appeal too was stonewalled, he filed a second appeal with the CIC and at the second hearing conducted by CIC Anandi Ramalingam, contested the exemptions which he had sent to the CIC. He argued that:
  • Exemptions without reasoning: A mechanical citation of section 8 does not discharge the burden of proof under Section 19(5) of the RTI Act.
  • Fresh grounds impermissible: The HC had directed reconsideration on the denial under Section 8(1)(j), but the CPIO expanded the scope of the denial by belatedly invoking new exemptions.
  • Public interest override: Given that the alleged Rs55 crore fraud is already in the public domain through press coverage and enforcement actions, disclosure is justified under section 8(2) in the larger public interest.
  • Precedents: The appellant cited earlier CIC rulings (including CIC/EPFOG/C/2019/114953) and Supreme Court judgments such as CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay (2011) and Union of India v. CIC (2019), which stressed that exemptions must be narrowly construed and disclosure is the norm.
 
After hearing both parties, CIC Ramalingam noted that the CPIO’s reliance on section 8(1)(g) and (h) was not supported by specific reasoning or justification. Hence, she directed the Bank’s general manager to file revised written submissions within 21 days, explaining how disclosure of the requested information would impede an ongoing investigation, if any.
 
Keeping in view the Delhi HC’s remand order of 29 May 2025, the CIC called for fresh submissions from both parties. The final decision has been reserved, and the matter adjourned pending fresh submissions. A copy of the order has been provided free of cost to both parties.
 
(Vinita Deshmukh is consulting editor of Moneylife. She is also the convener of the Pune Metro Jagruti Abhiyaan. She is the recipient of prestigious awards like the Statesman Award for Rural Reporting, which she won twice in 1998 and 2005 and the Chameli Devi Jain Award for outstanding media person for her investigation series on Dow Chemicals. She co-authored the book "To The Last Bullet - The Inspiring Story of A Braveheart - Ashok Kamte" with Vinita Kamte and is the author of "The Mighty Fall".)
 
Comments
Free Helpline
Legal Credit
Feedback