New Delhi. The Delhi High Court has overturned a Central Information Commission (CIC) directive requiring the Indian Air Force (IAF) to release flight records linked to foreign trips undertaken by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and former Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh. The court held that disclosure of the documents could expose sensitive security arrangements and potentially endanger the Prime Minister.
Justice Amit Mahajan ruled in favour of the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) at the Directorate of Personnel Services, Air Headquarters, affirming the IAF’s decision to withhold the records under Sections 8(1)(a) and 8(1)(g) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, which provide exemptions for information that could affect national security or endanger individuals.
The court found that the CIC had not adequately considered the security implications when it ordered the disclosure of Special Flight Returns (SFR-II). It observed that even if the names and identifying details of security personnel were removed, other information contained in the documents could still expose sensitive operational details.
Justice Mahajan noted that the use of public money for the Prime Minister’s overseas travel did not automatically make the associated records available for public scrutiny if their release could jeopardise security arrangements.
The ruling quashes the CIC’s order of July 8, 2020, which had instructed the IAF to provide certified copies of relevant SFR-II records relating to foreign visits by Modi and Manmohan Singh on IAF aircraft.
The matter originated in an RTI application submitted by retired Commodore Lokesh K Batra on June 5, 2018. He sought details of foreign travel undertaken by Indian Prime Ministers aboard IAF aircraft from April 1, 2013, up to the date of his application. In its initial response, the Air Force provided some information concerning Modi’s overseas travel. It also stated that Manmohan Singh had not travelled on IAF aircraft between April 1, 2013, and May 25, 2014.
However, the Air Force declined to provide copies of Special Flight Returns, Parts I and II, citing the sensitive and confidential nature of the documents. According to the IAF, the records contained information relating to aircraft, crew members, passengers and Special Protection Group (SPG) personnel assigned to the Prime Minister’s security detail. The service argued that these details, when assessed alongside information already available publicly, could help reveal aspects of the security arrangements for overseas visits.
After the First Appellate Authority dismissed Batra’s appeal in September 2018, he approached the CIC. The commission subsequently directed the Air Force to disclose the available and relevant SFR-II records, prompting the IAF to challenge the decision before the Delhi High Court.
During the proceedings, the Air Force maintained that the records contained multiple interconnected details, including the designations and appointments of passengers, identification numbers, flight references, passenger numbers and information about the agencies involved. Even without direct identifiers, it argued, these details could be pieced together to identify security personnel, establish the composition of the Prime Minister’s travelling party and infer patterns in security deployment.
Batra’s counsel contended that the information related to overseas travel financed by taxpayers and was therefore of considerable public interest. The counsel also argued that the application sought information about private individuals accompanying the Prime Minister at public expense, rather than the identities of security personnel.
The High Court, however, found that the use of public funds alone was insufficient to justify disclosure of information carrying potential security risks. It concluded that the case did not establish a sufficiently compelling larger public interest to override the applicable exemptions under the RTI Act.
