Whispers Forum

Appellant stated that the document on the basis of which the Competition Commission arrived at a conclusion in Case 25 of 2020 was not provided. PIO stated that the Appellant was seeking information pertaining to a quasi-judicial decision for which inspection of records was offered as per the CCI (General) Regulations, 2009 which was not availed off by him. PIO further stated that in case the appellant is dissatisfied with the outcome of the decision, he can exhaust the remedy available to him to appeal against the decision before the NCLAT. The CIC held that an appropriate response in accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 has been given by the PIO. The Appellant is at liberty to avail inspection of records as earlier offered to him on a mutually convenient date and time.
Comments
The use of RTI Act in quasi-judicial proceedings is not uncommon where the applicant tries to use another channel instead of the regular appellate remedy. Such attempts can provide a meaningful result only in cases where “information” is sought and there are no prescribed ways to obtain it.
Citation: Shri Prem Prakash v. Competition Commission of India, CIC/CPCOI/A/2023/105991; Date of Decision: 28.03.2024
Dr Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is a RTI Consultant currently working with IIM Visakhapatnam. She has co-authored the books, RTI Right to Information - Law and Practice and PIO’s Guide to RTI. She offers consultancy on RTI matters and Third party audit. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation of India at the link www.rtifoundationofindia.com

The recent Porsche car accident in Pune has once again drawn attention to the weakness in our traffic laws which are manipulated by the offenders. The Indian Penal Code containing these laws was enacted in the year 1860, when motor vehicles were nonexistent. The offence of causing death due to a rash or negligent act under section 304A was not as frequent and certainly multiple deaths would have been caused rarely. From accounts of those times, such as Charles Allen’s “Plain Tales from the Raj”, such offences were sometimes caused by the ruling British and other privileged classes during hunting expeditions, due to beating up of servants etc. No wonder section 304-A was made bailable, with imprisonment for only two years, though it caused death. As per newspaper reports the new criminal laws which will come in force from July 1, 2024 have proposed making this section non bailable, but there has been opposition from truckers associations. To overcome the handicap of 304A, we need to change the view in law that road accidents occur only due to rashness or negligence. In today’s modern and informed world, if a person talks on his phone while driving or drives after consuming alcohol or drives faster than the speed limit or allows a juvenile to drive his vehicle, etc. and thereby causes death or grievous hurt, it cannot be treated as mere negligence. It is in fact a deadly mix of arrogant defiance of the law and irresponsible behaviour. The police generally apply section 304-A in such cases, though a more effective remedy is available in the form of section 304 IPC (as distinct from section 304-A IPC). This section covers an act done with the knowledge that it is likely to cause death or fatal injury to another person, though the intention to do so is not there and death or fatal injury is caused. Unlike section 304-A, this section is non bailable, that is, the police cannot give bail and they have to produce the offender in court. Further, it has a provision of imprisonment up to ten years, unlike only two years under section 304-A. Unfortunately, the police resorts to section 304 mostly if there is a public or media uproar, such as occurred in the Pune Porche case or death of young businessman Siddharth Sharma in New Delhi in 2016. In this case the police arrested the juvenile driver of the Mercedes car under section 304-A and let him off on bail. When public and media outrage ensued, the police rearrested the juvenile under section 304 IPC along with his father for abetting the crime and the court rightly sent them to custody. Some other cases have occurred since then where section 304 was applied in the first instance, one of the latest being the death of three persons and injury to six persons on the 9 th November, 2023 by a speeding MUV on the Bandra-Worli Sea Link in Mumbai. Thus there is absolutely no legal hurdle in the application of section 304 in the special cases mentioned in the previous paragraph, such as drunken driving etc. Police departments of all the states need to expeditiously issue instructions accordingly, so that the application of section 304 is formalised and is not dependent on the choice of police stations. In Rathnashalvan v. State of Karnataka, the honourable High Court has held the same view and categorically stated that deterrence by way of fear of punishment should always be in the mind of a driver prone to driving rashly and negligently.
A R Pawar, former DGP Madhya Pradesh

It is true that India is still a young country. But our country needs to worry about senior citizens. In this case, the plan in the manifesto of the Bharatiya Janata Party is important that in future all senior citizens above 70 years of age will get the facility of Ayushman card. All parties have given assurances of implementing such schemes in their manifestos. However, in the context of senior citizens, they are most insecure about their health. In this view, it is being suggested that the age under the Ayushman Card Scheme should be 65 instead of 70.
Yogita Kumari
This channel is also a godi media’s partner.
Rakesh