New Delhi: Citing exemptions under the RTI Act, the State Bank of India (SBI) said it cannot provide to retired Commodore Lokesh Batra the data on electoral bonds it submitted to the Election Commission of India (ECI) on March 21.
It also declined to provide to Batra information on how much lawyer Harish Salve was paid to represent the bank in the Supreme Court on March 11, when its application asking for three months’ extra time to disclose bonds data was dismissed.
The SBI submitted data on electoral bonds purchased between April 2019 and February 2024, including unique numbers associated with each bond that would help match bond donors with recipient political parties, to the ECI on March 21 following Supreme Court orders.
The ECI made the data public on its website on the same day.
But when Batra asked the SBI for the data it provided to the ECI on March 21, the bank said the information was covered under exceptions in the RTI Act dealing with fiduciary responsibilities and personal information.
“Information sought by you is containing details of purchases and political parties and hence cannot be disclosed as it is held in fiduciary capacity, disclosure of which is exempted under Section 8(1)(e) and (j) of the RTI Act,” the SBI wrote to Batra on Wednesday (April 10).
Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act exempts information “available to a person in his fiduciary relationship” unless a competent authority decides its disclosure is in the larger public interest.
Fiduciary responsibilities involve trust, especially in situations involving control of others’ money or property.
Subsection (1)(j) exempts “personal information” whose disclosure is unrelated to the public interest or whose disclosure “would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual”, unless designated officials decide otherwise.
Batra said the bank’s denial of this information was “bizarre”, saying the data was “already in [the] public domain on [the ECI’s] website”.
To his query on the “total amount” Harish Salve was paid to represent the SBI’s case, the bank again invoked exemptions in the RTI Act.
“The information sought by you is third party personal information available with the bank in fiduciary capacity,” the SBI said, referring to Sections 8(1)(e) and 1(j) of the Act.
It added: “The same is also of commercial confidence in nature, hence denied as it is exempted under Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act.”
Subsection (1)(d) exempts information “including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party”, unless relevant authorities direct its disclosure.
Batra said the SBI had denied “info which involved tax payers’ money paid to [senior advocate] … Harish Salve” for defending the bank in the apex court.
When it comes into force, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 will amend Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act to more broadly exempt “information which relates to personal information”.
Electoral bonds were interest-free financial instruments that individuals or groups may use to make anonymous donations to political parties. The BJP government introduced them in 2018.
But on February 15 this year, the Supreme Court said the bonds violated voters’ right to information and were thus unconstitutional.
On March 21, the Supreme Court heard the SBI’s request for time till June 30 – until after the general elections are scheduled to finish – to disclose data on bonds, but said the bank was not being asked to match donor and recipient data and was instead asked for a “plain disclosure”.
