STOCK MARKET BSE NSE

Prison department denies information to Perarivalan

The prison department has refused to disclose the information sought by A G Perarivalan (alias) Arivu, a death row convict in Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, stating that revealing the details in any form would result in ‘trans-border ramification with far-reaching consequences.’

Published: 12th September 2013 10:27 AM  |   Last Updated: 12th September 2013 10:27 AM   |  A+A-

The prison department has refused to disclose the information sought by A G Perarivalan (alias) Arivu, a death row convict in Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, stating that revealing the details in any form would result in ‘trans-border ramification with far-reaching consequences.’

Sources close to Arivu said he would challenge the prison department in the video conference, which would be held on Thursday.

Deputy Inspector General (DIG) of Police and Prisons (Head Quarters) A G Mourya said the information sought by the appellant would not be disclosed under the Section 8 (1) (a) of the RTI Act as the information sought by the petitioner involved the relationship of India with a neighbouring country.

Mourya has communicated this to the State Information Commission (SIC), following the outcome of the hearing of Arivu’s RTI applications through video conferencing on August 21.

The appellant had urged the SIC during the video conferencing to direct the prison department to provide a copy of the permission letter issued by the Additional Director General of Police (Prisons), to research scholar Reena Mary George, to interview the death row convicts in Vellore Central Prison for Men on April 13, 2011, to defend his case. He had also pleaded for the photocopies of the correspondence and orders pertaining to his mercy plea since June 12, 1999.

Though the prison department had accepted to issue the details regarding the medical reports of the petitioner as per the SIC’s direction, it confronted to grant information pertaining to the other two legal appeals.

The DIC, citing Section 8 (1) (a) of the RTI Act, said the provision, inter alia, states that disclosure of an information detriment to the relation of the country with a foreign country should be refused to be furnished,” said the DIG in the reply.

Though the information sought is under the provision of life and liberty of an individual, the two appeals raise important legal issues confronting the interest of the State. “Anything said or done by way of disclosure of information in this state of affairs will certainly entail trans-border ramification with far-reaching consequences which cannot be as of now, visualised,” he further said in the response to the SIC.



Comments

Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the newindianexpress.com editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on newindianexpress.com are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of newindianexpress.com or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. newindianexpress.com reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.

flipboard facebook twitter whatsapp