RTI - NO Exemption 8(1)(j) or Maintaining Confidentiality of information when its disclosure would mean a greater or larger than public interest as compared to confidentiality

Banks can NOT 

withhold information merely citing 

Personal Exemption Clause 

(Arguments helpful for RTI Activists)

Larger Public Interest:- The argument seems to be in consonance with the former stance of the Delhi High Court in the case of Secretary General, Supreme Court v Subhash Chandra Agarwal, (Writ Petition Number 288/200) while dealing with the scope and ambit of exemption clauses under the right to information act.  The court in this case discussed that the exemption of withholding information because of fiduciary relationship may not apply in cases involving a larger public interest the same way as a man cannot be made confidant of a crime or a fraud. “This is a limiting principle where balance has to be maintained between weighing the public interest in maintaining confidence against a countervailing public interest favoring disclosure. Embraced within this limiting principle is, of course, the so called defense of iniquity wherein in certain circumstances the public interest in maintaining confidence may be outweighed by the public interest in disclosure. The court also discussed the factum of right of privacy being in constant conflict with right to information. The right to privacy can be waived off if the applicant can show sufficient public interest.” The above observations of the court constantly seem to reiterate the principle on which the right of information act rests. It reiterates the principle of disclosure being the norm and refusal being an exception.

 (ATUR CHATUR)

C/o   Q-7/77, GF, Sector-30, Rohini, Delhi-110085

Email:          aturchatur@yahoo.com

Phone:                          09873540498