Table of Contents
Court-directed non-disclosure — §8(1)(b) — CIC
Central Information Commission · 2018-01-01 · Citation awaited
Sealed-cover / in-camera court orders trigger §8(1)(b) protection until the court's order is varied.
Case details
| Court | Central Information Commission |
|---|---|
| Decided | 2018-01-01 |
| Citation | Citation awaited |
| Petitioner | RTI applicant |
| Respondent | Various public authorities |
| RTI Act sections | §8(1)(b) |
| Outcome | Rejected |
Outcome
Information expressly forbidden from disclosure by a court's sealed-cover / in-camera order is §8(1)(b) protected.
Ratio decidendi
§8(1)(b) expressly protects information whose disclosure has been forbidden by any court or tribunal, or whose disclosure would constitute contempt of court. The PIO must cite the specific court order being honoured; blanket invocation is not sufficient.
Keywords
sealed cover, §8(1)(b), CIC, contempt
Similar cases in the corpus
These rulings have the closest editorial ratio to this case — computed by tf-idf cosine similarity over ratio, keywords and Act sections. Useful starting points if you are researching the same point of law.
- Defying Commission order — Madras HC (HC-MAD 2020)
- Subordinate-court judge transfers — CIC (CIC 2018)
- Gujarat HC pleadings — third-party RTI not maintainable (HC-GUJ 2019)
- RTI whistleblower protection — §8(1)(g) (SC 2014)
Related
Editorial summary, not a certified report. The ratio here is an editorial compression. Before citing this ruling in a PIO order, FAA speaking order, or any appellate filing, verify against the full reported decision. RTI Wiki is not a legal service.
Editorial summary · last reviewed 21 April 2026.
Discussion