The Karnataka High Court upheld the protection of personal information under the RTI Act, dismissing a petition seeking disclosure of passport details and Lookout Circular (LOC) records of an accused in a Section 138 NI Act case. The Court observed that disclosure of such personal data could endanger life and compromise privacy, emphasizing that RTI exemptions and privacy laws must guide information access in sensitive law enforcement matters.
Brief Facts:
The petitioner had filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against an accused, which was registered at the JMFC, Puttur. During the investigation, the accused absconded, prompting the issuance of a Lookout Circular. The accused was later detained and released at Mumbai International Airport. The petitioner filed applications under the Right to Information Act seeking copies of the accused’s passport, the LOC issued against him, and related records maintained by the SP, Mangaluru.
These RTI requests were rejected by the authorities, citing exemptions under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act and the applicability of Section 24(4), which excludes certain intelligence and security organizations, including Special Branch units of District Police Offices, from disclosure obligations. Subsequent appeals to higher authorities were also dismissed. Aggrieved, the petitioner approached the High Court challenging these rejections.
Contentions:
The petitioner contended that access to the passport and LOC records was necessary to aid the prosecution of the Section 138 NI Act case. Counsel argued that the information was relevant to the legal proceedings and sought disclosure under the RTI Act.
Whereas, the State and other respondents maintained that the information sought was personal and sensitive. They relied on Section 8(1)(g) and 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, emphasizing that disclosure could endanger life, compromise security sources, or impede law enforcement processes. They also contended that the RTI Act does not extend to Special Branch units as per the government notification under Section 24(4).
Observations of the Court:
The Court examined the exemptions under the RTI Act, Section 8(1)(g) protects personal information that could threaten life or safety or reveal confidential sources, while Section 8(1)(h) exempts information that could impede investigations or prosecutions. Section 24(4) further excludes certain intelligence and security organizations from RTI obligations.
Further the Court noted, “The disclosure of the information like a passport, in my considered opinion, being personal in nature would cause immense harm and injury to a person. The details of a passport are private, and if made available to any third party, including the petitioner, it could cause danger to the life or physical safety of the concerned person.”
The Court also clarified that while the petitioner seeks the information for use in Section 138 proceedings, such access can be sought directly within the legal proceedings where the Court may consider the necessity of those documents. The High Court explicitly stated that it was not expressing any opinion on the merits of such applications within the criminal case.
The decision of the Court:
The Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the RTI exemptions and privacy considerations justified the non-disclosure of the passport and LOC records. The Court reiterated that personal information and documents pertaining to law enforcement and security cannot be disclosed indiscriminately and may be accessed only through proper judicial channels in the relevant proceedings. The petitioner was granted the liberty to request the documents during the Section 138 NI Act proceedings, subject to judicial scrutiny.
Case Title: Prakash Chimanlal Sheth vs. State of Karnataka & Ors.
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 17341 of 2025 (Gm-Res)
Coram: Justice Suraj Govindaraj
Advocate for Petitioner: Adv. G. Ravishankar Shastry
Advocate for Respondent: Adv. Saritha Kulkarni and G.B. Sharath Gowda
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
