RTI & charge-sheet

The question is why should charge-sheet against criminally suspected persons be made public, especially when public servants or leaders are accused? Context was the RTI application of one Usha Kanth Asiwal seeking to know from Director of Vigilance, Delhi, details of a complaint made to the Anti-Corruption Bureau and an inquiry leading to registration of case against 13 persons under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The Public Information Officer denied it, claiming disclosure would impede investigation or prosecution. The senior officer who heard first appeal confirmed the denial. Such process forces the persons to approach the Information Commissioner.

There is no specific provision under any law which states that charge-sheet is a public document, but there are several judgements of the Supreme Court and the High Courts, which clarify that charge-sheet is a public document. Queen-Empress v. Arumugan and Ors ((1897) ILR 20 Mad 189) has held that any person who has an interest in criminal proceeding has a right to inspect under Section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act. In N David Vijay Kumar v The Pallavan Gram Bank, Indian Bank in File No. CIC/SG/A/2012/000189, CIC Shailesh Gandhi ordered disclosure of the charge-sheet, ruling out the contention of exemption under the Section 8(1)(j).

In criminal trials, the State will prosecute the accused on the basis of a charge-sheet. The cause title will be State vs Mr X, unlike the cause title of civil dispute – Mr A vs Mr B. State in a democracy consists of people at large and the police prosecute the charge-sheeted accused on behalf of the people constituted into a state. The FIR is in public document and the trial is conducted in open and the judgments of conviction and acquittal are discussed open. There is a huge public interest in a criminal trial.

Section 173 of CrPC provides ‘right to information’ and ‘duty to report.’ The moment investigation is completed a ‘report’ has to be given to Magistrate [s.173(2)] concerned, who a public authority and has to prosecute the accused against whom the report of completed investigation i.e., charge-sheet is filed. Section 173(8) mandates the investigating officer to forward further evidence, report or reports regarding evidence etc., which means supplementary or additional charge-sheets to the Magistrate.

It also provides for giving the report to the person who informed about the offence. That means a complainant or informant has to be provided with a copy of charge-sheet. In a criminal prosecution, complainant/informant is not a party to trial. He need not be an aggrieved party as he should in civil suits. Anybody can complain or any person can inform the police about the happening of an offence. Importantly, once the charge-sheet is sent to a Magistrate, the trial will be set in motion, which is supposed to be an open trial, which again means any person can have access to the contents of charge-sheet and see the prosecution being present in the court room where trial is going on.

As per the Criminal Procedure, the charge-sheet is the end product of investigation. With the filing of charge-sheet, the investigation is closed and the defence that investigation might get impeded does not stand at all. Considering the provisions of CrPC Evidence Act, the RTI Act, erudite judicial pronouncements, certain transparency practices in CVC, facts and circumstances of the case and contentions raised, it can be stated that the charge-sheet is a public document.

Supreme Court in Vineet Narain & Others vs Union Of India & Another on 18 December, 1997, directed: A document on CBI's functioning should be published within three months to provide the general public with a feedback on investigations and information for redressal of genuine grievances in a manner which does not compromise with the operational requirements of the CBI.

The charge-sheet is held by the investigating officer, or public authority or court of law. As per the RTI Act, any information held by the public authority can be accessed by the citizen subject to the exceptions provided under Section 8. Because the charge-sheet contains the evidence which need to be adduced in the court of law, there is a possibility of opening up many details which could be personal or private or confidential. If the allegation requires to be proved by call data, the charge-sheet refers to sheets of call data, which surely contain call details unrelated to allegation. That could be private information which needs to be protected.

Hence, each charge-sheet has to be separately examined and only after separating unnecessary and unrelated details of evidence, and only required and permissible information out of charge-sheet should be disclosed. Thus, the charge-sheet can neither be prohibited en bloc from disclosure nor disclosed totally.

It has to be decided on facts whether disclosure of charge-sheet will really obstruct investigation, apprehension or prosecution. The judgment of the Delhi High Court in W.P.(C) No.3114/2007 – Shri Bhagat Singh Vs. Chief Information Commissioner & Ors on this aspect is of relevance, since it deals with the applicability of the Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act 2005: S Ravinder Bhat J specifically notes, “As held in the preceding part of the judgment, without a disclosure as to how the investigation process would be hampered by sharing the materials collected till the notices were issued to the assessee, the respondents could not have rejected the request for granting information. …” Compared to FIR, the charge-sheet is a document prepared after investigation which prima facie established truth of allegations contained in FIR and a public document based on which apprehension and prosecution is possible. While FIR is an unverified, not-investigated allegations which could be described as ‘wild’, the charge-sheet makes a person accused based on collected evidence.

Filing a charge-sheet is an important phase in criminal trial which leads to ‘framing of charges’ by the court and then after prosecution might result in either conviction or acquittal. Charge-sheet is more authentic and legally strong document than a primary complaint called FIR. If FIR can be in public domain, there is no reason why charge-sheet should not be.

It can be inferred that there is no specific provision anywhere prohibiting the disclosure of charge-sheet and if the disclosure does not affect investigation or prosecution it can be permitted under the RTI, unless there is a public interest against disclosure.

The charge-sheets containing charges under Prevention of Corruption Act, especially against public servants, need to be in public domain, in public interest. There cannot be a general hard and fast rule that every charge-sheet could be disclosed or should not be.

Each RTI request for copy of charge-sheet requires to be examined and only permissible part should be given.