The public interest test in the context of the RTI Act
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10044 OF 2010
CENTRAL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ….. APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
SUBHASH CHANDRA AGARWAL ….. RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10045 OF 2010
A N D
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2683 OF 2010
J U D G M E N T
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
76. The public interest test in the context of the RTI Act would mean
reflecting upon the object and purpose behind the right to
information, the right to privacy and consequences of invasion,
and breach of confidentiality and possible harm and injury that
would be caused to the third party, with reference to a particular
information and the person. In an article ‘Freedom of Information
Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 & Ors. Page 89 of 108
and the Public Interest: the Commonwealth experience’ published
in the Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal,51 the factors
identified as favouring disclosure, those against disclosure and
lastly those irrelevant for consideration of public interest have
been elucidated as under:
“it is generally accepted that the public interest is not
synonymous with what is of interest to the public, in the
sense of satisfying public curiosity about some matter.
For example, the UK Information Tribunal has drawn a
distinction between ‘matters which were in the interests
of the public to know and matters which were merely
interesting to the public (i.e. which the public would like
to know about, and which sell newspapers, but... are
not relevant).
Factors identified as favouring disclosure include
the public interest in: contributing to a debate on a
matter of public importance; accountability of officials;
openness in the expenditure of public funds, the
performance by a public authority of its regulatory
functions, the handling of complaints by public
authorities; exposure of wrongdoing, inefficiency or
unfairness; individuals being able to refute allegations
made against them; enhancement of scrutiny of
decision-making; and protecting against danger to
public health or safety.
Factors that have been found to weigh against
disclosure include: the likelihood of damage to security
or international relations; the likelihood of damage to
the integrity or viability of decision-making processes:
the public interest in public bodies being able to
perform their functions effectively; the public interest in
preserving the privacy of individuals and the public
interest in the preservation of confidences.
51 Published online on 28th August, 2017
Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 & Ors. Page 90 of 108
Factors irrelevant to the consideration of the public
interest have also been identified. These include: that
the information might be misunderstood; that the
requested information in overly technical in nature; and
that disclosure would result in embarrassment to the
government or to officials.”
77. In Campbell (supra), reference was made to the Press
Complaints Commission Code of Practice to further elucidate on
the test of public interest which stands at the intersection of
freedom of expression and the privacy rights of an individual to
hold that:
“1. Public interest includes:
(i) Detecting or exposing crime or a serious
misdemeanour.
(ii) Protecting public health and safety.
(iii) Preventing the public from being misled by some
statement or action of an individual or organisation....”
78. Public interest has no relationship and is not connected with the
number of individuals adversely affected by the disclosure which
may be small and insignificant in comparison to the substantial
number of individuals wanting disclosure. It will vary according to
the information sought and all circumstances of the case that bear
upon the public interest in maintaining the exemptions and those
in disclosing the information must be accounted for to judge the
right balance. Public interest is not immutable and even time-gap
Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 & Ors. Page 91 of 108
may make a significant difference. The type and likelihood of harm
to the public interest behind the exemption and public interest in
disclosure would matter. The delicate balance requires
identification of public interest behind each exemption and then
cumulatively weighing the public interest in accepting or
maintaining the exemption(s) to deny information in a particular
case against the public interest in disclosure in that particular
case. Further, under Section 11(1), reference is made to the
‘possible’ harm and injury to the third party which will also have to
be factored in when determining disclosure of confidential
information relating to the third parties.