Security First: Delhi HC Blocks Disclosure of PMs Foreign Travel Records
Delhi High Court sets aside CIC order to reveal flight records of PM Modi and Manmohan Singh, citing national security risks.
The Delhi High Court has stepped in to protect the confidentiality of high-level security arrangements, setting aside a Central Information Commission (CIC) order that had demanded the disclosure of flight records pertaining to the foreign visits of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. The court ruled that releasing such sensitive data could seriously compromise national security and the personal safety of the Prime Minister.
The Legal Battle Over Flight Returns
The controversy began when retired Commodore Lokesh K Batra filed a Right to Information (RTI) application on June 5, 2018. Batra sought detailed information regarding foreign trips undertaken by Indian Prime Ministers using Indian Air Force (IAF) aircraft from April 1, 2013, onwards.
While the Air Force provided some general information regarding PM Modi's travels and clarified that Manmohan Singh had not traveled via IAF aircraft between April 1, 2013, and May 25, 2014, it firmly refused to hand over the Special Flight Returns (SFR-I and SFR-II). The IAF argued that these documents were highly confidential and contained sensitive data.
Why the Air Force Refused Disclosure
The Directorate of Personal Services, Air Headquarters, maintained that the Special Flight Returns were not mere travel logs. According to the IAF, these records contained:
- Details of the aircraft and aircrew involved.
- Identification numbers and designations of passengers.
- Specifics regarding the Special Protection Group (SPG) personnel accompanying the Prime Minister.
- Passenger strength and agency particulars.
The Air Force warned the court that if these details were made public, they could be correlated with other information already available in the public domain. This, they argued, would allow adversaries to decode the composition of the Prime Minister's entourage and identify patterns in security deployment.
Public Interest vs. National Security
The case took a turn when the CIC, in July 2020, ordered the Air Force to provide certified copies of the SFR-II records, suggesting that names and identifying details of security personnel could simply be redacted (blacked out) before release.
However, during the High Court proceedings, Commodore Batra's counsel argued that the request was rooted in public interest. The argument was that since public funds were used for these foreign visits, the public had a right to know who accompanied the Prime Minister—specifically to identify if any private individuals were traveling at the taxpayers' expense.
The Court's Final Verdict
Justice Amit Mahajan rejected the argument that the use of public money automatically outweighed security concerns. The court observed that the CIC had erred in believing that redaction would eliminate all risks.
"The mere fact that public funds have been expended on the foreign visits of the Hon’ble Prime Minister does not, by itself, justify disclosure of information which may compromise the security arrangements put in place for such visits," Justice Mahajan observed.
The court concluded that the Air Force was justified in denying the request under Sections 8(1)(a) and 8(1)(g) of the RTI Act, which protect information that would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India or the safety of any person. Consequently, the CIC's 2020 order was set aside, ensuring the flight records remain classified.