2019 (4) TMI 1630 - SC - Indian Laws

Who can file contempt petition - Whether the information sought under the Right to Information Act, 2005 can be denied by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and the other banks on the ground of economic interest, commercial confidence, fiduciary relationship or public interest? HELD THAT - There is no fiduciary relationship between the RBI and the other banks, this Court stressed the importance of the RTI Act, and held that it is in the interest of the general public that the information sought for by the Respondents therein has to be furnished. There is a specific reference to the inspection reports and the other materials, which were directed to be given to the Respondents therein. The Respondents have committed contempt of this Court by exempting disclosure of material that was directed to be given by this Court. In all fairness, Mr. Gupta has submitted that the disclosure policy shall be deleted from the website - We do not agree with Mr. Gupta that a contempt petition is maintainable only at the behest of a party to the judgment. The directions issued by this Court are general in nature and any violation of such directions would enable an aggrieved party to file a contempt petition. Contempt petitions are disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
Contempt of court for non-compliance with directions issued in a judgment related to disclosure of information under the Right to Information Act, 2005 by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI).

Contempt Petition (C) No.412 of 2016:
The petitioner sought information regarding losses in foreign derivative contract cases from RBI. Despite directions to provide information, incomplete responses led to a contempt petition. The RBI eventually complied, but the petitioner alleged intentional withholding of information.

Contempt Petition (C) No.59 of 2017:
The petitioner requested details of Show Cause Notices and fines imposed by RBI on banks. RBI's non-disclosure based on exemptions under the RTI Act led to a contempt petition. The petitioner challenged RBI's Disclosure Policy of 30.11.2016, claiming it contradicted the court's directions.

Contempt Petition (C) No.928 of 2016:
The petitioner sought inspection reports of several banks under the RTI Act, which RBI denied citing exemptions. The petitioner filed a contempt petition, alleging non-compliance with the court's judgment on disclosure of information.

Analysis:
The Supreme Court emphasized that under the RTI Act, information should be disclosed unless falling under specific exemptions. The court held that RBI must provide information regarding inspection reports and other documents to the public. Exemptions under Section 8(1) were clarified, highlighting the balance between transparency and safeguarding national economic interests.

The court rejected arguments for reconsideration of its previous judgment, emphasizing the importance of upholding the RTI Act. It noted that any violation of its directions could lead to contempt proceedings, irrespective of the party's involvement in the original judgment. The court directed RBI to withdraw the disclosure policy conflicting with its previous directions and warned of serious consequences for further violations.

In conclusion, the contempt petitions were disposed of with directions for RBI to comply with the court's orders on information disclosure. The judgment reaffirmed the significance of transparency and accountability in governance while balancing it with national interests as per the RTI Act.