Delhi Police's 394-Day RTI Delay: How Information Denial Enables Police Impunity

The Application That Took 394 Days

On September 12, 2023, human rights lawyer Anjali Verma filed an RTI application to Delhi Police seeking information about custodial death cases in three South Delhi police stations. The request was straightforward:

1. Number of custodial deaths reported in 2022-2023
2. FIRs registered against police personnel in these cases
3. Departmental action taken against implicated officers
4. Compensation paid to victims’ families
5. Status of ongoing investigations

What followed was a masterclass in bureaucratic obstruction that lasted 394 days.

Timeline of Systematic Delay

September 12, 2023: Application Filed

• Standard RTI application submitted with ₹10 fee
• Acknowledgment received: Application No. DP/RTI/2023/012467

October 15, 2023: Statutory Deadline Passed

• No response after 30 days
• No communication from PIO about delay reasons

November 20, 2023: First Follow-up

• Reminder sent to PIO citing Section 7(1) violation
• Auto-reply received confirming receipt

December 18, 2023: First Appeal Filed

• Appeal to First Appellate Authority citing willful delay
• Requested penalty under Section 20(1) against PIO

February 2024: Transfer Maze Begins

The application began a bewildering journey through Delhi Police’s bureaucracy:

• Feb 5: Transferred to Crime Branch
• Feb 20: Returned to originating station
• Mar 8: Transferred to Legal Cell
• Mar 25: Transferred to Vigilance Department
• Apr 12: Transferred back to Crime Branch

Each transfer consumed 15-20 days with no substantive progress.

June 2024: Second Appeal to CIC

With first appeal yielding only promises, the case moved to Central Information Commission.

October 2024: CIC Hearing

• Delhi Police claimed “complex coordination required across multiple units”
• CIC ordered response within 15 days with ₹5,000 penalty to PIO

October 10, 2024: Partial Response (Day 394)

After 394 days, Delhi Police provided:

• Heavily redacted statistics
• Refusal to share FIR details citing “ongoing investigation”
• No information about departmental action
• No compensation details

Anatomy of Institutional Obstruction

The Transfer Tactic

Delhi Police employed the classic transfer maze strategy:

• Move application between departments to consume time
• Each transfer resets informal timelines
• Creates plausible deniability about responsibility

The “Complexity” Defense

Police cited coordination challenges, but:

• Requested information is routinely compiled for parliamentary questions
• Similar data shared with NHRC without 394-day delays
• Internal systems track all requested categories

Strategic Non-Compliance

Even after CIC order:

• Response was deliberately incomplete
• New grounds for exemption introduced
• No explanation for 394-day delay

The Real Cost of Delay

For Victims’ Families

• Justice delayed while evidence deteriorates
• Psychological toll of prolonged uncertainty
• Reduced leverage in seeking accountability

For Public Oversight

• Systematic delays chill RTI usage
• Creates precedent for acceptable non-compliance
• Undermines deterrent effect of transparency laws

For Democratic Accountability

• Police impunity enabled by information blackout
• Public trust eroded by apparent cover-up
• Constitutional right to information rendered meaningless

Pattern Analysis: Delhi Police RTI Delays

Our database analysis reveals disturbing patterns:

Category	Average Delay	Common Excuse
Custodial deaths	287 days	”Ongoing investigation”
Police complaints	156 days	”Complex coordination”
Encounter cases	423 days	”Security concerns”
Budget allocations	89 days	”Financial sensitivity”

Key Finding: More sensitive the topic, longer the delay - suggesting deliberate obstruction rather than capacity issues.

Legal Precedent and Violations

Section 7(1) - Response Timeline

Clear violation requiring 30-day response with possible 48-hour extension.

Section 18 - Transfer Provisions

Transfers must be completed within 5 days, not used as delay tactic.

Section 20(1) - Penalty Provisions

₹5,000 penalty grossly inadequate for 394-day delay.

Current Status and Next Steps

CIC Follow-up

Second complaint filed regarding incomplete response and failure to explain delay.

High Court Petition

Considering writ petition challenging systematic delays as violation of Article 19(1)(a).

Systemic Reform Advocacy

Working with parliamentary committee on RTI effectiveness.

Documents and Evidence

Available for download:

• Original RTI Application
• Complete Transfer Log
• CIC Order with Penalty
• Incomplete Response Analysis

Broader Implications

This case exemplifies how law enforcement agencies systematically abuse RTI processes:

1. Delay as Denial: Extended delays serve same function as outright rejection
2. Institutional Learning: Sophisticated obstruction techniques shared across departments
3. Accountability Vacuum: Penalties insufficient to deter willful non-compliance

Call to Action

Citizens: Document police RTI delays and share with our database Activists: File penalty complaints for every delayed response Legal Community: Consider strategic litigation on systematic delays Policymakers: Strengthen penalty provisions and oversight mechanisms

---

This 394-day saga demonstrates that police accountability requires vigilant citizen action. Every delayed RTI response is a victory for impunity. Report police RTI delays to our monitoring project.