2006 Mumbai blasts: Death row convict’s plea for ‘background notes’ junked

The outfit was proscribed  under the stringent anti-terror law Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
Delhi High Court (File Photo | Shekhar Yadav, EPS)
Delhi High Court (File Photo | Shekhar Yadav, EPS)

NEW DELHI:  The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed a petition by a death row convict in the 2006 Mumbai train blast case seeking disclosure of information pertaining to the ban imposed on the terrorist outfit Indian Mujahideen.  

Ehtesham Qutubuddin Siddique had filed an application under the RTI Act seeking “background notes” of the Centre and reports of state governments of Gujarat, Delhi and Andhra Pradesh in relation to the ban on the organisation, which was stated to have carried out the blast. 

The outfit was proscribed under the stringent anti-terror law Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The petitioner challenged in the high court an order passed by the Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) on June 13, 2019, denying him the information on the ground that it was covered under the exemptions provided in the RTI Act.

While refusing to interfere with the CIC’s decision, Justice Prathiba M Singh said the information sought by the petitioner has far-reaching consequences and has to be seen from the “larger issue of safety and security of the public and the nation”. 

It said the information Siddique has sought if provided, will have a bearing on the sovereignty and security of the country. “A perusal of the information shows that the same has far-reaching consequences. The same organisation is stated to be involved in various unfortunate incidents since 2005, some resulting in severe loss of life and property,” said the court.

It observed that the disclosure of the information sought by the petitioner can “jeopardize the sources” of the government in relation to the ban on Indian Mujahideen and the CIC’s opinion that sharing the information would endanger the sources is “correct and does not require interference”. “In view of the above, the writ petition is devoid of merit and is dismissed,” ruled the court. 

Related Stories

No stories found.

X
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com