Follow TNM’s WhatsApp channel for news updates and story links.
“It is not possible to collect and provide the requested information,” the Tamil Nadu police has said in response to TNM’s request for data on extrajudicial killings.
The surprising reply citing administrative constraints that could affect their routine duties was given in response to a Right to Information (RTI) request submitted by TNM to the Director General of Police (DGP) office on July 27. The request seeking details of extrajudicial killings in Tamil Nadu from 1990 to March 2025 was made after several incidents of custodial deaths and extrajudicial killings were reported across the state recently.
In the reply that TNM received on November 11, the DGP’s office said that the requested data is not maintained at the headquarters and that compiling information from all district and city police offices would place a burden on the department.
“Collecting and compiling such data would divert the regular work of this department and adversely affect day-to-day functioning. Therefore, it is informed that it is not possible to collect and provide the requested information,” the DGP’s office said in a written response.
SC judgement cited
The reply also referred to a Supreme Court judgement in Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) vs Aditya Bandhopadhyaya, delivered by a two-judge bench comprising Justice RV Raveendran and Justice AK Patnaik. In the case, the court observed, “The nation does not want a scenario where 75% of the staff of public authorities spend 75% of their time in collecting and furnishing information to applicants instead of discharging their regular duties.”
The case was regarding an RTI application by a student Aditya Bandhopadhyaya, who sought copies of his evaluated class 12 answer sheets. The CBSE had denied the request, arguing that the answer sheets were confidential and disclosure could compromise the integrity of the examination process.
However, students have the right to inspect their own answer sheets, the Supreme Court had said, observing that the evaluated answer sheets qualify as information under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. At the same time, the court cautioned against the misuse of the RTI Act through indiscriminate or impractical demands that do not serve transparency or accountability.
‘Lack of transparency’
RTI activist SP Thiyagarajan said the police response shows the department’s lack of transparency.
“The requested details are information that can be declared to the public. If they do not have the data, they should forward the request to the designated office and inform the petitioner about the action. In this case, they should have sent the request to either the commissionerate or SP office of all the districts. The response shows a lack of transparency,” he said.
"Section 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act mandates every public authority to voluntarily disclose a broad range of information to the public within 120 days of the Act’s enactment. This has not been done in the 20 years since the Act was passed. Even when a petition is filed, they refuse to provide answers,” Thiyagarajan added.
Aseervatham, a human rights activist associated with the NGO People’s Watch, alleged that the police refusing to provide the data was in an effort to prevent scrutiny.
“Even though the DGP office has the data, they do not want it to be shared with the public. They do not agree that most of the killings were done extrajudicially,” he said.
“They want to hide the killings. If one gets the data, they may approach the court seeking a probe using the RTI response as evidence. That's why they categorically denied the request,” he stated.