An appeal under subsection 1 of section 19 of the Right to Information Act 2005 as PIO denied sought information.
To
First appellate authority/
Senior superintendent of police
District-Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Subject-PIO/Additional Superintendent of police, the State legislature cryptically denied the sought information on the flimsy ground through its communication dated-22/10/2019 which was received on 29/10/2019 which is ultra vires to the Right to Information Act 2005.
Most revered Sir –Your applicant invites the kind attention of Hon’ble Sir with due respect to the following submissions as follows.
Hon’ble Sir may be pleased to take the perusal of the report dated-25-Sept-2019 submitted by circle officer Cant, Santosh Kumar Singh, on the Jansunwai portal of the Government of Uttar Pradesh attached with this communiqué as page 1.
The second and third page of the annexure is the submissions of the aggrieved applicant in order to clarify the matter.
CPIO may be directed to provide the following information point-wise as sought.
1-Please provide access to information regarding the public documents manipulated by the aggrieved applicant Dinesh Pratap Singh as charge sheet submitted under serious sections 448,406,420,467,468,471,394 of India Penal Code in the courts of law by the police.
Appeal point-1-Reply of PIO is completely misleading as information seeker sought information regarding the public documents manipulated by information seeker but PIO concerned only misled the information seeker nothing else. Here this question arises that why did PIO not make available the description of the manipulated documents or their copies if available to the public authority?
2-Please, provide access to information regarding the public documents manipulated by the aggrieved applicant’s wife Kesar Singh and daughter Abha Singh as charge sheet submitted under serious sections 448,406,420,467,468,471,394 of India Penal Code in the courts of law by the police.
Appeal point-2-Reply of PIO is completely misleading as information seeker sought information regarding the public documents manipulated by Abha Singh D/O information seeker but PIO concerned only misled the information seeker nothing else.
3-Please provide the detail of the competent authority who declared, the agreement paper and power of attorney, provided before the registrar of Lucknow, by Babu Singh to Dinesh Pratap Singh, illegal.
Appeal point-3-Matter is concerned with the working of the police so in accordance with the law, the police are authorized to provide the aforementioned information. If PIO concerned deem fit that such information is closely connected to the working of the lower court, then R.T.I. Communique must be transferred to CPIO district Judge under subsection 3 of section 6 of the Right to Information Act.
4- According to report of Manoj Kumar Sub-inspector Police station Ashiyana, District Lucknow dated 07 June 2019, Babu Singh Son of R. P. Singh died on 11 May 2019 at Dehradun in Uttarakhand but circle officer Cant Mr Durgesh Kumar Singh making claims differently. According to the report submitted by the aforementioned circle officer dated 04 Sept 2019, Babu Singh Son Of R. P. Singh died on 12 April 2019 at Dehradun in Uttarakhand.
Please provide the documents proving/supporting confliction/contrary claims in the dates of death of Babu Singh. Communication of former circle officer Tanu Upadhyay is also supporting the claim of Manoj Kumar Sub-inspector, Police station, Ashiyana. Whether Babu Singh’s mysterious death really took place on the aforementioned dates?
Appeal point-4-From the reply of the PIO itself obvious that he has not provided any documents in support of death of Babu Singh as he has not attached any document with the communication dated-22/10/2019. In regard to the mysterious death of Babu Singh, he had to voluntarily make available the supportive documents because of conflictive reports of police concerned but made a futile attempt to cover the matter under the carpet.
5-Please provide the detail of witness testimony of Babu Singh ever given by him before the Lucknow police in the matter concerned as his witness if ever examined by the police is the core of the entire controversy.
Appeal point-5-Right to information act 2005 was enacted by the parliament of this country to promote transparency and accountability in the working of the public authority. From the comment of PIO, it is quite obvious that such information has been made available to court so why not information seeker? According to the provision of R.T.I. Act 2005, whatever information can be made available to parliament or state legislature by the public authority, the same information can also be made available to information seeker under the Right to Information Act 2005.
6-Please provide the detail of name and designation of the police officer who carried out the investigation in the matter concerned and the senior rank officer who approved the investigation blindly as false fabricated charges imposed not only applicant but also wife and daughter in order to hatch a conspiracy to expel from the house purchased by the applicant through appropriate process in accordance with the law.
Appeal point-6-PIO is concealing the name of the senior rank officer who approved the findings of the investigation officer blindly as false fabricated charges were imposed on the applicant and his daughter and wife as a conspiracy in order to expel from the land and house by making a mockery of the order passed by the Lucknow bench of the High court of judicature at Allahabad.
Please provide the aforementioned sought information point-wise as sought by the information seeker. As well as initiate departmental proceeding against the aforementioned PIO for concealing the sought information in order to conceal the wrongdoings of the staffs of the public authority. For this applicant shall ever pray you, Hon’ble Sir.
Date-30/10/2019 Yours sincerely
Dinesh Pratap Singh S/O Angad Prasad Singh
C/O Yogi M. P. Singh, Mobile number-7379105911, Mohalla- Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road, Lakshmi Narayan Baikunth Mahadev Mandir District-Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, Pin code-231001.
When Government of Uttarakhand could not put light on the death of Babu Singh, then how can Lucknow police who itself indulged in this conspiracy?
ReplyDeleteAccording to report of Manoj Kumar Sub-inspector Police station Ashiyana, District Lucknow dated 07 June 2019, Babu Singh Son of R. P. Singh died on 11 May 2019 at Dehradun in Uttarakhand but circle officer Cant Mr Durgesh Kumar Singh making claims differently. According to the report submitted by the aforementioned circle officer dated 04 Sept 2019, Babu Singh Son Of R. P. Singh died on 12 April 2019 at Dehradun in Uttarakhand.
Please provide the documents proving/supporting confliction/contrary claims in the dates of death of Babu Singh. Communication of former circle officer Tanu Upadhyay is also supporting the claim of Manoj Kumar Sub-inspector, Police station, Ashiyana. Whether Babu Singh’s mysterious death really took place on the aforementioned dates?
It is a fact that Lucknow police did not provide information to the information seeker as sought by him which is reflecting rampant corruption in the department of police and most surprising is that they still not disclosed the fact that how Babu Singh died on two dates.
ReplyDelete