Delhi HC: RTI security exemptions shield PM's IAF flight records
The Delhi High Court on 15 October 2026 set aside a 2020 Central Information Commission order that told the Indian Air Force to release Special Flight Returns on the Prime Minister's foreign visits. It held the records exempt under sections 8(1)(a) and 8(1)(g) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, citing national security and the Prime Minister's safety.
Syllabus: Prelims · Polity & Governance; GS4 · Probity in Governance; GS2 · Statutory & Regulatory Bodies
Why this matters for UPSC
GS2 transparency and statutory bodies: Prelims can ask which RTI Act exemptions are absolute and what section 8(2), section 8(3) and section 24 provide; Mains, about national security versus the right to information and the Central Information Commission's role.
Why it matters
A citizen who files an RTI application to see how public money is spent on official travel now has a clear limit: where the records could expose how a protected leader is guarded, the answer can be a refusal even after names are blacked out. The Central Information Commission, which hears second appeals, has been told it cannot overrule a security agency's own judgment of the risk. Small details matter here because a passenger list, read alongside news reports and photographs, can show who travels with the Prime Minister and how often. The larger question is old: how to keep government open about spending while keeping its security arrangements hidden.
Prelims pointers
- Section 8(3), RTI Act, 2005: information on an event twenty years old must be given on request, except information under clauses (a), (c) and (i) of section 8(1).
- Section 8(2): notwithstanding the Official Secrets Act, 1923, a public authority may allow access to exempt information if public interest in disclosure outweighs harm to protected interests.
- Section 8(1)(e) and 8(1)(d): fiduciary information and trade secrets are released if the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants it.
- Section 24 proviso: human-rights information from a Second Schedule organisation is provided only after the Central Information Commission approves, within 45 days of the request.
- Section 19(5): in any RTI appeal, the onus of proving that a denial was justified lies on the information officer who denied the request.
- Section 12(3): the President appoints the Chief and other Information Commissioners on a committee's recommendation: the Prime Minister, the Lok Sabha's Leader of Opposition and a nominated Union Cabinet Minister.
- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019: amended section 13 so that the Central Government prescribes the term, salaries and service conditions of Information Commissioners.
- Section 8(1)(j), substituted by the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 with effect from 13 November 2025, now exempts information which relates to personal information.
Practise a UPSC-style question
With reference to the exemptions in section 8(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, consider the following statements:
1. Information available to a person in a fiduciary relationship is exempted under clause (g).
2. Clause (a) exempts information whose disclosure would prejudicially affect the strategic or economic interests of the State.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- (a) 1 only
- (b) 2 only
- (c) Both 1 and 2
- (d) Neither 1 nor 2
Show the answer
Answer: (b) 2 only
Answer: (b) 2 only. Fiduciary information falls under clause (e); clause (g) covers danger to life or physical safety.
Statement 1: incorrect. Section 8(1)(e) exempts information available to a person in a fiduciary relationship; clause (g) covers information that would endanger life or physical safety or identify a confidential source.
Statement 2: correct. Section 8(1)(a) covers the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State and relations with foreign States.
Eliminate: Statement 2 reads clause (a) as the Act writes it, so it is correct. Out: (a), (d).
Eliminate: Statement 1 moves the fiduciary exemption from clause (e) to clause (g), so it is incorrect. Out: (c).
Trap: Swapped attribution. The Air Force first cited clauses (a) and (e), and the court upheld (a) and (g); the statement pins clause (e)'s subject on clause (g).
Remember: (a) security of the State; (e) fiduciary relationship; (g) life or physical safety.
Explainers on this topic
More from the 21 October 2026 edition
- India, US review ties in Mumbai, hold trilateral with UAE World & IR
- ECI lets EROs decide SIR discrepancy notices; hearings made exceptional Polity
- Tamil Nadu funds 25 extra work days beyond VB-G RAM G's 125 National
- Japan launches MMX probe to bring back a sample from Phobos Sci-Tech
- Chhattisgarh's Sirpur enters India's UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List National
- SC directs Northeast panel to recommend law changes against racial harassment Polity
- No tax deducted on interest from NDB's Maharajah rupee bonds Economy
- India at UN renews offer of a multilateral No First Use pact World & IR
- Supreme Court directs Centre to publicise Section 164A interim relief scheme Polity
- Dissent against a court verdict is not enmity: Karnataka High Court Polity
- SCO Council of Heads of Government adopts 2027 budget in Dushanbe World & IR
- UN dues: India tells Fifth Committee the Charter requires full, timely payment World & IR