1 2025:CGHC:38634-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 562 of 2025 1 - Rahul Gupta S/o Pawan Kumar Gupta Aged About 42 Years R/o M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur 492001 (Chhattisgarh), Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - Chhattisgarh State Information Commission Sector 19, North Block, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 492002, Chhattisgarh 2 - Station House Officer And Public Information Officer, Police Station Mahila Thana Ambikapur 497001 District Surguja (Chhattisgarh), Chhattisgarh 3 - Additional Superintendent Of Police And First Appellate Authority Office Of Supeintendent Of Police, Ambikapur- 497001 District Surguja (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) SHOAIB ANWAR Digitally signed by SHOAIB ANWAR Date: 2025.08.05 19:04:34 +0530 2 For Appellant : Shri Rahul Gupta, Appellant in person For Respondent No. 1 :Shri Shyam Sunder Lal Tekchandani, Advocate For Respondent No. 2 & 3 :Shri S.S. Baghel, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 05.08.2025 1. The present writ appeal has been filed with the following prayer:- “ 3.1 Admit this writ appeal and Set aside the impugned order dated 17.06.2025 passed by the Hon'ble Single Bench in W.P.(C) No. 2054 of 2025. 3.2 Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus, commanding Respondent No. 2 to forthwith furnish the complete and accurate information sought by the Petitioner in the RTI application dated 05.07.2023 (Annexure P-3), in strict and immediate compliance with the order dated 03.02.2025 passed by Respondent No. 1 (Annexure P-7). 3.3 Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus, commanding Respondent No. 1 (State Information Commission) to immediately exercise its powers under Section 20 of the RTI Act to initiate, conduct, and conclude, within a time- frame stipulated by this Hon'ble Court, proceedings for the imposition of the maximum permissible penalty upon Respondent No. 2 for the willful non- compliance with its order, and ensure recovery thereof. 3.4 Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the false 3 reply to subsequent RTI applications (Annexure P-10 (Colly.)) filed by Respondent No. 2 (Annexure P-11) and the consequential order passed by Respondent No. 3 (Annexure P-12). 3.5 Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, commanding Respondent No. 1 (State Information Commission) to immediately exercise its powers under Sections 18 and 20 of the RTI Act to ensure compliance by Respondent No. 2 with its order dated 03.02.2025 (Annexure P-7). 3.6 appropriate writ, order, or direction, commanding Respondent No. 1 to immediately initiate, conduct, and conclude, within a time-frame stipulated by this Hon'ble Court, proceedings under Section 20(1) for the imposition of the maximum permissible penalty upon Respondent No. 2 for unjustified delay and willful non-compliance with its order dated 03.02.2025, and ensure recovery thereof according to law. 3.7 Issue appropriate directions to Respondent No. 2 to ensure that all pending and future RTI applications filed by the Petitioner, pertaining to ongoing legal matters necessitating information for their defense, are dealt with and disposed of strictly in accordance with the time limits and provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, without requiring repeated interventions. 3.8 Direct the Respondents, jointly and severally, to pay adequate monetary compensation to the Petitioner for the profound harassment, mental agony, financial loss (including litigation costs), and prejudice suffered due to the protracted denial of information and violation of fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(a), and 21 and and as provided for under Section 19(8)(b) of the RTI Act. 4 3.9 Award the costs of this litigation in favour of the Petitioner and against the Respondents. 3.10 Recommend to the competent disciplinary authority to consider initiating appropriate disciplinary proceedings against Respondent No. 2 for dereliction of statutory duties and defiance of lawful orders, and against Respondent No. 3 for failure of adequate supervision, in accordance with the applicable service rules. 3.11 Pass such other and further order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.” 2. At the very outset, appellant in person submits that he wants to withdraw this appeal with liberty to approach the learned Single Judge. 3. Accordingly, the instant Writ Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty as stated supra. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Shoaib/Amardeep