Section 3 — Right to Information

“Subject to the provisions of this Act, all citizens shall have the right to information.”

• “Subject to the provisions of this Act” — the right is bounded by the Act itself: the exemptions of §8, the copyright limit of §9, and the excluded bodies of §24 (intelligence and security organisations, with the corruption-and-human-rights proviso). No outside limitations are implied.
• “all citizens” — not residents, not companies, not associations as such. The Citizenship Act, 1955 defines who a citizen is; the RTI right follows that definition.
• “shall have the right” — mandatory language; the machinery in §§5–19 exists to make this right effective, and §20 penalises the officers who defeat it.

Practical consequences:

• Sign in your own name. An application signed by an advocate “for” the applicant invites a citizenship objection; a citizen-relative or advocate who is themselves a citizen signs as the requester.
• No ID is normally demanded. The central and state rules require only the applicant's declaration as a citizen; PIOs may seek citizenship proof only where there is genuine, recorded doubt — a blanket “attach Aadhaar” demand is not in the rules.
• Companies route: information a company needs (tenders, licences, inspections) can be sought by a director or officer personally — the reply comes to the citizen who asked.

The statutory right did not arrive from nowhere. The Supreme Court had long located a right to know in Article 19(1)(a):

• State of U.P. v. Raj Narain, (1975) 4 SCC 428 — the people of this country have a right to know every public act done by their public functionaries.
• S.P. Gupta v. President of India, AIR 1982 SC 149 — the right to know is implicit in the right to free speech and expression; disclosure serves public accountability.

Section 3 converts that constitutional principle into an enforceable, procedural right with deadlines, appeals and penalties — which the Constitution's version never had.

• §2(f) + §2(j) define what the right reaches: records, documents, memos, opinions, advice, press releases, circulars, contracts, reports — and the modes of access: inspection, extracts, certified copies, samples, disk or tape.
• §4 imposes proactive disclosure — information the authority must publish without anyone asking.
• §6 starts your side: any citizen's written request.
• §7 clocks the reply; §19 repairs failures; §20 punishes.
• §24 lists the organisations excluded — but even there, corruption and human-rights allegations can be asked about.

No — §6(2): an applicant cannot be required to give reasons or personal circumstances beyond contact details.

Yes. Citizenship is the test; postal/online filing works from anywhere (rtionline.gov.in for central authorities).

Each signs as an applicant — practically, one citizen signs and the others are described in the request; the PIO responds to the applicant of record.

Not under the rules. Proof can be asked only on genuine doubt; a blanket demand is appealable.

Ready to use the right? Start with How to file an RTI in India, or draft in a minute with the AI RTI Drafter.

• Back to the full RTI Act
• Section 2 — Definitions
• Section 6 — Request for information
• Section 8 — Exemptions
• Section 24 — Excluded organisations
• All explanations
• The RTI Playbook book

1. Right to Information Act, 2005, Sections 2(f), 2(j), 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 19, 20, 24; Citizenship Act, 1955.
2. State of U.P. v. Raj Narain, (1975) 4 SCC 428; S.P. Gupta v. President of India, AIR 1982 SC 149.
3. Department of Personnel and Training, Guide on the RTI Act, 2005 (citizens-only filing; no upfront ID requirement).

Last reviewed: 27 August 2026. Text and boundary sections re-checked; the truncated statutory quote in the old description repaired; the unverifiable “Raj Sharma v. CIC (Delhi HC 2016)” citation dropped.