Chhattisgarh High Court rules inquiry records for self-defense must be disclosed if no third-party…

This digest summarizes six Right to Information (RTI) rulings from September 2026 issued by various High Courts and the Central Information Commission. It covers questions regarding the disclosure of inquiry records, government service details, CCTV footage, and academic answer scripts, as well as the imposition of penalties and fees.

The rulings concern public authorities including the Chhattisgarh High Court, Uttarakhand High Court, Allahabad High Court, Gujarat High Court, and the Central Information Commission (CIC). The applicants involved include individuals seeking records for self-defense, a husband seeking information on his estranged wife's government service, an RTI applicant seeking CCTV footage, an information seeker requesting third-party assistance in inspecting documents, and a student seeking answer scripts from a university.

• Denial of inquiry records under Sections 8(1)(c) and 8(1)(j) is impermissible if no third-party privacy is involved.
• Denial of information regarding an estranged spouse's government service is upheld if privacy outweighs other material.
• Imposition of penalty under Section 20 requires a categorical finding that information was withheld mala fide.
• CCTV footage covered by Section 8(1)(g) cannot be supplied directly to the applicant; they must approach a court or commission.
• It is impermissible for an information seeker to use third parties to inspect documents under the RTI Act.
• Universities cannot levy internal fees for providing copies of answer scripts sought under the RTI Act.

Written from the document by AI, and checked against it. The original below is authoritative.

The original document