Court: Central Information Commission
Central Information CommissionRoom No.307, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi¬11006
Appeal No. CIC/MP/A/2014/001767
Appellant: Smt. Rani Nigam, Sitapur Public Authority State Bank of India, Lucknow
Date of Hearing: May 25, 2015
Date of Decision: May 29, 2015
Appellant:Shri Anil Kumar (Appellant’s representative)- through VC
Respondent:Shri A K Saxena, CM (Admin.) and Shri Yogesh Kumar, Mgr.through VC
CCTV Footage of a Public Place is in the Public Domain and Cannot be Denied to a Citizen
1.The appellant submitted RTI application dated March 10, 2014 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), State Bank of India, Lucknow seeking information regarding action taken on her complaint dated 4.12.2013 in which she had sought CCTV footage w.r.t. to illegal withdrawal of money from her account through ATM etc.; through a total of 3 points.
2.Vide letter dated March 22, 2014, the CPIO informed that money was withdrawn from the ATM machines of different banks for which the appellant could seek the CCTV footage from the Banks concerned and as far the withdrawal from ATM of SBI at Lucknow was concerned they were in the process of requesting the branch concerned for CCTV footage and as soon as footage is sent to them it will be made available to the appellant .Not satisfied with the reply given by the CPIO concerned, the appellant preferred an appeal dated April 15, 2014 to the first appellate authority (FAA). Vide order dated May 19, 2014; the FAA upheld the decision of CPIO; however, while directing the CPIO to give a clear reply to the appellant, if available.
3.Dissatisfied with the response of the public authority, the appellant preferred the present appeal before the Commission.
4.The matter was heard by the Commission. The appellant’s representative submitted that the appellant had sought the CCTV footage of the ATM booth but the same had not been CIC/MP/A/2014/001767 Page 1 provided so far. It was told that once it was made available to them from the other bank it will be provided to the appellant but it was not provided till date. He stated that due to illegal transactions, the appellant had lost about Rs.2.75 lakhs. He also stated that last transaction was made on 14.11.2013.
5. The respondents submitted that a total of 64 small transactions were made through the ATM card between 2010 to 2013 at different stations and on different dates. Even ATMs of different banks were used for withdrawing money. They stated that SMS facility was activated on the said account, which would enable to the ATM card holder to receive a communication if any transaction was made from her account. The last transaction from State Bank of India ATM was done on 12.1.2012 and they keep the video footage for 90 days as their policy decision. The official complaint was lodged on 15.1.2014 only. The last transaction through the said card was done at the ATM of Vijaya Bank, Lucknow; they had written the Vijaya Bank but had not received the video footage from them so far.
6.The Commission accepts the submissions made by the respondents, however, directs them to check the status and provide the CCTV footage, if available to the appellant within 7 days of the receipt of this order of the Commission. The appeal is disposed of.