Public records especially court records are not private

Public records especially court records are not private
CIC Order No : CIC/WB/A/2007/01170
Operative Section : Section 8(1) (j) & 11(1) of the RTI Act.
Brief of CIC Order :
Commission while allowing the appeal directed the CPIO to provide the information to the appellant held by the CPIO within 15 working days from the date of receipt of the order.
Writ Petition No : 8524/2009, Delhi High Court.
Issue :
Whether the Commission was justified in disclosing the information to the respondent.
Brief of Court Order :
Court dismissed the petition while observing,
It may be noted here that the information sought for by respondent no.2 relates to criminal complaints filed against the petitioner, FIRs registered against him, their current status and whether warrants were issued against some persons, police reports on execution of warrants and their current status. The aforesaid information is already as observed by the CIC, part of public records including court records. It is obvious and admitted that complaints are pending and FIRs have been registered and the same have been filed with the criminal court. Issue of arrest warrants and submissions of reports thereon also form part of the court records. It may be relevant to state here that the petitioner himself has admitted that he has disputes with various parties and litigations are pending. He has also given details of some of the FIRs registeredagainst him, their current status and whether warrants were issued against some persons, police reports on execution of warrants and their current status. The aforesaid information is already as observed by the CIC, part of public records including court records. It is obvious and admitted that complaints are pending and FIRs have been registered and the same have been filed with the criminal court. Issue of arrest warrants and submissions of reports thereon also form part of the court records. It may be relevant to state here that the petitioner himself has admitted that he has disputes with various parties and litigations are pending. He has also given details of some of the FIRs registered against him in the Writ Petition itself. It may be appropriate here to reproduce the ratio as expounded by the Supreme Court in Raj Gopal versus State of Andhra Pradesh (1994) 6 SCC 632 which reads as under:
(1) A citizen has a right to safeguard the privacy of his own, his family, marriage, procreation, motherhood, childbearing and education among other matters. (2)None can publish anything concerning the above matters without his consent  whether truthful or otherwise and whether laudatory or critical. If he does so, he would be violating the right to privacy of the person concerned. But a publication concerning the above aspects becomes unobjectionable, if such publication is based upon public records including court records. Once  something becomes a matter of public record, the right of privacy no longer exists. The only exception to this could be in the interest of decency.
(3) In the case of public officials, it is obvious that right of privacy or for that matter, remedy of action for damages is simply not available with respect to their acts and conducts relevant to the discharge of their official duties. This is so even where the publication is based upon the acts and statements that are not true unless the official establishes that the publication was made with reckless disregard for truth.
(4) So far as the Government, local authority or other organization and institution exercising governmental power are concerned, they cannot maintain suit for damages for defaming them.
Status : Disposed of on 04.11.2009.