Lucknow: Disposing of an appeal under RTI Act, UP State Information Commission observed that a person not related to, or authorised by, family of a road accident victim could not seek information about the victim’s death, as information sought was “personal”.A bench headed by information commissioner Mohammad Nadeem rejected an RTI application seeking information from the Uttar Pradesh Expressway Authority, stating there was no justification for providing information regarding a person killed in a road accident to an unrelated person. The bench stated in its order that if, in future, the family of the deceased, legal heir, or duly authorised individuals submitted application with necessary documents, the application would be considered independently in accordance with the law.
In this case, a person who was resident of Lucknow died in a road accident on the Agra-Lucknow Expressway on Dec 5, 2022, in Mainpuri district.The applicant, not related to the victim or authorised by his family, submitted an application under the RTI Act to the Expressway Authority, seeking details of the vehicle involved in the accident, details of the FIR registered at the Karhal police station in Mainpuri, and certified copies of all records related to the accident from the Authority.The applicant filed an appeal in the SIC after he got no information from the authority.The bench stated in its order, “RTI applicant is neither a family member, legal heir, nor an authorised representative of the deceased. The applicant has not submitted any document to establish that he or she has the right to receive information on behalf of the deceased’s family. The road accident and its related records are personal and sensitive information relating to the deceased, which is protected under Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.“The bench also clarified that such information could not be provided without consent of the family or an order of a competent court. A potential compensation claim or preparation for any judicial proceeding is not in itself a public interest, and therefore, there is no legal justification for providing information on this ground.
