In a recent decision, the Delhi High Court has ruled that information concerning the interception, tapping, or tracking of phones falls within the exemption category for disclosure under Section 8 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act). The court emphasized that such disclosure could be construed to prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India.

The case involved an appeal by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) against a directive from the Central Information Commission (CIC). The CIC had instructed TRAI to provide information requested by an individual regarding the surveillance and tracking of his phone under the provisions of the RTI Act.

The Division Bench, comprising Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Amit Mahajan, addressed the appeal and considered TRAI's submission that dominion over the information by a public authority is a prerequisite for any application under the RTI Act. TRAI argued that the information related to surveillance is outside its jurisdiction and that the functions of TRAI under the TRAI Act are limited to those cited in Section 11 of the TRAI Act.

The court referred to the Indian Telegraph Act and observed that surveillance, tracking, or tapping is carried out under the directions of the government, not telecom service providers. It stated that any order passed by the government in relation to interception or tracking is done in the interest of sovereignty, integrity, security, foreign relations, public order, or preventing incitement to the commission of an offense. Therefore, the disclosure of such information may impede investigations and prejudicially affect national interests, justifying exemption under Section 8 of the RTI Act.

The court concluded that information related to interception, tapping, or tracking of phones ordered by the government under Section 5(2) of the Indian Telegraph Act may attract exemption under Section 8 of the RTI Act. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal, setting aside the earlier judgment that had upheld the CIC's directive.

This decision reinforces the court's stance on the sensitive nature of information related to phone surveillance and its potential impact on national interests, security, and ongoing investigations. It underscores the exemption clause in the RTI Act, emphasizing the need to balance transparency with the protection of crucial state interests.

Case: Telecom Regulatory Authority Of India v. Kabir Shankar Bose & Ors.

LPA 721/2018 & CM APPL. 53526/2018.