Delhi High Court
Aditya Chauhan & Anr vs Union Of India & Anr on 2 July, 2025
Author: Tushar Rao Gedela
Bench: Tushar Rao Gedela
$~31.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ Date of Decision: 02.07.2025
% W.P.(C) 8830/2025
ADITYA CHAUHAN & ANR. .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Hemant Jain, Mr. Aditya
Chauhan, Mr. Arjun Choudhary and
Mr. Arnav Singh, petitioners in
person.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Amit Tiwari, CGSC with Mr.
Shivam Sachdeva, GP, Ms. Ayushi
Srivastava and Mr. Ayush Tanwar,
Advs.
CORAM:
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ. (ORAL)
1. Heard the petitioners who appear in person and Mr. Amit Tiwari,
CGSC representing the respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
2. This public interest litigation petition raises concern in respect of
information being provided by the Public Information Officers (PIOs) and
other authorities under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter
referred to as the ‘2005 Act’) in modern electronic forms/ modes such as
email and pen drives.
3. It has been stated on behalf of the petitioners that though the 2005 Act
contains adequate provisions conferring right to seek information in
electronic modes as well, however, it has been observed that the PIOs and
other authorities are not providing the said information in present day by the
frequently used electronic modes such as emails and pen drives.
W.P.(C.) No.8830/2025 Page 1 of 5
Signature Not Verified
Digiltally Signed
By:SREERAM L
Signing Date:03.07.2025
10:40:45
4. It has further been stated that the Right to Information Rules, 2012
(hereinafter referred to as the ‘2012 Rules’) framed under Section 27 of the
2005 Act lack the requisite framework so as to ensure that information
sought under the 2005 Act is provided by the PIOs and other authorities in
the modern electronic forms/ modes.
5. In light of these averments a direction has been sought to be issued to
the authority concerned to evolve a proper mechanism so that information
under the 2005 Act is provided in all possible electronic modes, including
emails and pen drives.
6. Learned counsel representing the respondents has very fairly drawn
our attention to the definition of the term ‘Right to Information’ occurring in
Section 2(j) of the 2005 Act and has submitted that Right to Information
includes right to obtain information not only in the form of diskettes,
floppies, tapes, video cassettes but also in any other electronic mode or
through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any
other device.
7. Section 2(j) of the 2005 Act is extracted hereinbelow:
“2. Definitions.–In this Act, unless the context otherwise
requires,–
x x x
(j) “right to information” means the right to information
accessible under this Act which is held by or under the control
of any public authority and includes the right to–
(i) inspection of work, documents, records;
(ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents
or records;
(iii) taking certified samples of material;
(iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes,
floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic
mode or through printouts where such information isW.P.(C.) No.8830/2025 Page 2 of 5
Signature Not Verified
Digiltally Signed
By:SREERAM L
Signing Date:03.07.2025
10:40:45
stored in a computer or in any other device;”
8. When we peruse Clause (iv) of Sub Section (j) of Section 2 of 2005
Act, what we find is that the said provision defines Right to Information and
includes the right to obtain information in other ‘electronic mode’ as well.
9. Section 4(4) of 2005 Act is also relevant to be noticed for
appropriately appreciating the concern raised by the petitioners in this PIL
petition. The said provision provides that all materials shall be disseminated
taking into consideration various aspects, including ‘the most effective
method of communication’. It further provides that the information should
be easily accessible, to the extent possible in electronic form and that shall
be made available free or at such cost of the medium as may be prescribed.
Section 4(4) runs as under:
“4. Obligations of public authorities.
x x x
(4) All materials shall be disseminated taking into
consideration the cost effectiveness, local language and
the most effective method of communication in that local
area and the information should be easily accessible, to
the extent possible in electronic format with the Central
Public Information Officer or State Public Information
Officer, as the case may be, available free or at such cost
of the medium or the print cost price as may be
prescribed.
Explanation.–For the purposes of sub-sections (3) and
(4), “disseminated” means making known or
communicated the information to the public through
notice boards, newspapers, public announcements, media
broadcasts, the internet or any other means, including
inspection of offices of any public authority. ”
10. Our attention has also been drawn to Section 7(9) of the 2005 Act
W.P.(C.) No.8830/2025 Page 3 of 5
Signature Not Verified
Digiltally Signed
By:SREERAM L
Signing Date:03.07.2025
10:40:45
which contains a provision stating that information shall ordinarily be
provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately
divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the
safety or preservation of the record in question. Section 7(9) of the 2005
Act is extracted hereinbelow:
“7. Disposal of request.–
x x x
(9)An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in
which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the
resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the
safety or preservation of the record in question. ”
11. Thus, a conjoint reading of Section 2(j)(iv), Section 4(4) and Section
7(9) of 2005 Act goes on to establish that any information sought under the
2005 Act has to be provided in all possible electronic modes, including
email and pen drive. However, such right under the Act has been conferred
with the caveat, according to which, information shall be provided in the
form in which it is sought, provided it would not disproportionately divert
the resources of the public authority or if it is detrimental to the safety or
preservation of the record in question.
12. Sub Section (9) of Section 7 provides adequate protection to the
record and does not permit dissemination of information by the PIOs and
other authorities under the 2005 Act in the form in which it is sought, if it is
detrimental to the safety or preservation of the records in question.
13. From the aforesaid discussion we are convinced that ordinarily the
information sought under the 2005 Act should be provided to the
information seeker in the mode in which it is sought, subject, however to
certain conditions as can be found in Sub-Section (4) of Section 4 of the
W.P.(C.) No.8830/2025 Page 4 of 5
Signature Not Verified
Digiltally Signed
By:SREERAM L
Signing Date:03.07.2025
10:40:45
2005 Act.
14. When we peruse the 2012 Rules, what we find is that the said Rules
do not address a situation where information under the 2005 Act is sought in
a particular mode such as email or a pen drive.
15. Accordingly, we are of the opinion that adequate framework may be
put in place to make the information seeker realize the true purport of the
rights under the 2005 Act.
16. Accordingly, we dispose of this petition with a direction to the
appropriate authority of the Government of India to consider the aforesaid
aspects and take appropriate measures by issuing directions or framing rules
or otherwise by any other legally permissible means to ensure that
information as sought under the Right to Information Act is provided to the
information seeker in the modes in which he intends to obtain the
information with adequate safety measures as enumerated in Section 4(4)
and Section 7(9) of the 2005 Act. The consideration of the issue raised in
this PIL and decision thereon shall be taken by the competent authority in
the Government of India within a period of 3 months from today. We
request the learned counsel representing the respondents to communicate
this order to the competent authority of the Government of India forthwith.
17. The present petition is disposed of accordingly.
DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA , J
JULY 02, 2025/ N.Khanna
W.P.(C.) No.8830/2025 Page 5 of 5
Signature Not Verified
Digiltally Signed
By:SREERAM L
Signing Date:03.07.2025
10:40:45