The Supreme Court has struck down a 2011 notification issued by the Madhya Pradesh Government that exempted the Special Police Establishment (SPE) of the Lokayukta Organisation from the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005, holding that the SPE cannot be treated as an ‘intelligence and security organisation’ under Section 24(4) of the RTI Act. The Court upheld the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s direction requiring disclosure of information relating to the sanction granted for prosecution of a public servant under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Also Read No Ticket Found After Fatal Fall from Bombay Local Train, Yet Compensation Granted by the Bombay HC
A Bench of Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar held that the notification dated August 25, 2011 travelled beyond the scope of the parent legislation, observing that the SPE is empowered only to investigate corruption-related offences and offences under Sections 409, 420 and Chapter XVIII of the Indian Penal Code. Such functions, the Court held, do not render it an ‘intelligence and security organisation’ entitled to exemption under Section 24(4) of the RTI Act.
The case arose from an RTI application filed by a police officer seeking information regarding the decision-making process leading to the grant of sanction for his prosecution in a corruption case. While the State Information Commission had denied the information by invoking Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, the High Court directed its disclosure after finding that the investigation had already concluded. Challenging that decision, the Special Police Establishment relied on the 2011 notification excluding it from the RTI regime.
Although the validity of the notification had not been specifically challenged before the High Court, the Supreme Court exercised its jurisdiction to examine its legality after granting the State Government a full opportunity to justify it. The Court reiterated that subordinate legislation may be tested even in the absence of a specific prayer where it is found to exceed the authority conferred by the parent statute.
Examining the statutory framework, the Court noted that Section 24 of the RTI Act exempts only ‘intelligence and security organisations’ established by the Central or State Governments. Referring to the organisations listed in the Second Schedule to the RTI Act, such as the Enforcement Directorate, CRPF, BSF and NIA, the Bench observed that these bodies are fundamentally concerned with intelligence gathering and national security. In contrast, the Lokayukta’s SPE is constituted solely to investigate allegations of corruption against public servants and related offences, and therefore falls outside the ambit of Section 24(4).
Holding that the notification did not conform to the statutory requirements of the RTI Act and was excessive in nature, the Court declared it invalid to the extent it excluded the SPE from the Act’s application. However, it clarified that it had not examined the notification insofar as it related to the State Bureau of Investigation of Economic Offences, which would continue to remain governed by the notification. Consequently, the criminal appeal was dismissed while maintaining the High Court’s order directing disclosure of the information sought under the RTI Act.
