About 482 crpc fir quashing

Amit Joshi (Querist) 24 March 2020 This query is : Resolved
Hello, I am Amit Joshi. I have booked in false atrocities FIR about in caste name abuse, which come from our property matter. In OCT 2018, I got interim order against Mr. XYZ. Court has restained him for entering my property. From then, he is pestering me. In Feb 2019, he file false atrocities FIR against me stating incident in Sept. 2018. I got ancipatory bail from court on 06 April 2019. On 07 April 2019 he again filed false atrocities FIR against me stating incident in November 2018 again I got ancipatory bail from court. Police has filed chargesheet in both cases in June 2019. If you go through the facts you see that, first FIR is filed in Feb 2019 and incident in 2nd FIR was in November 2018, It means he can very well mention 2nd FIR incident in 1st FIR but he did not, once court allowed me ancipatory bail he went to Police station filed 2nd false FIR. That's why, in June 2019, I filed 482 CrPC application to High court for qaushing of 2nd FIR. In August 2019, he again filed application in court for my bail cancellation again with an false incident. Still he is doing something against me to harrasse me. Already, I have some doubts about his caste certificate but that time I don't have time and knowledge to search about his real caste.
In Jan 2020, I filed RTI application in department where he work and from them I got Certified reply about his caste as "GENERAL CATEGORY". Till, 23 march 2020 My case is not on board(it is unready)in high court. Propably, next date have argument. But, my advocate is saying me that we can not use such RTI Certified copy as evidence because Judge decides case only on the basis of FIR copy and evidence collected from police, we cannot submit evidence here and if we submit evidence here, court will ask us to face the trail and submit evidence there. I am not sure that his advice is right, Is really petitioner (who is accussed in FIR) can't submit evidence in 482 CrPC in High court ? Please, suggest any case law or legal provision where it it mention that petitioner can submit evidence in 482 CrPC application. Also, express your thought on my advocate opinion.

Follow Query

Report Abuse

Dr J C Vashista (Expert) 24 March 2020
You should have faith in the lawyer engaged / paid by you and follow him/her since s/he is well aware about facts and circumstances of the case (which are vague and unclear in this post) besides the fact s/he is an able, competent and intelligent enough to guide you properly.
However, if you have lost faith in your lawyer it is better to change him/her immediately.

Rajendra K Goyal (Expert) 24 March 2020
Your lawyer is fully aware of the case file, believe in him and proceed as per his advice. If you feel his advice is not proper, may proceed to change lawyer.

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Expert) 24 March 2020
May be your lawyer is guiding you properly out of his experience in such cases.
However in my opinion it cannot be said that the high court will not consider your pleadings in this aspect also.
You may produce the evidence before the high court in the quash petition on the date of hearing and present our arguments additionally on the basis of the new evidence also.
The new evidence is not the one discovered now for this purpose nor it has been created newly to fill up any lacuna.
Therefore there is nothing wrong in presenting before the court the substantial evidence which has been obtained through RTI act in order to prove tht the respondent has filed multiple proceedings against you on the basis of a fake identity which is nothing but an abuse of law and misuse of the provisions of law in this regard.
If you feel that your lawyer is not capable of handling this case effectively you may change the lawyer abruptly and look for a lawyer who yo feel can handle the case more effectively.

Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 24 March 2020
I slightly differ with the opinion of your lawyer though you should have faith in him but once you have decided to have second opinion, I completely agree with the advice of T. Kalaiselvan.

A petitioner/accused has every right to put the established fact before Hon'ble High Court in his petition filed under section 482 Cr. PC wherein High Court has extra-ordinary power to take into consideration the relevant facts for the decision of the petition. Law of natural justice demands that a person should should not come to the court seeking equity with unclean hands.

Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 24 March 2020
I additionally suggest you to immediately initiate proceedings under section 340 Cr. PC against the complainant who falsely claimed himself as belonging to SC category and filed two FIRs on that basis and further filed another petition before Hon'ble High Court seeking cancellation of bail granted to you. This proceeding should be got initited at all 3 levels so that he may be got taught a good lesson.

Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 24 March 2020
One thing is required to be clarified by you. Whether the complainant had not provided any certificate of his caste? If yes then one more offence seems committed by him. He has two certificates one of the general caste and another of SC caste. If he belongs to Sc caste then why he has not submitted such certificate to his employer department?

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Expert) 24 March 2020
I fully agree with our expert lawyer Shri Makkad Sir.
The defacto complainant should have produced the certificate to prove his community while filing the said cases against you.
Since you have proof to prove that he do not belong to the said community that too the evidences were collected through RTI act, you can very well initiate perjury case besides other cases on the charges of fraud played upon as well as cheating, breach of trust, high handedness, criminal intimidation etc.
You may decide further course of action based on the prevailing circumstances, if need be you may change your lawyer too.
As a matter of fact if the court refuses to accept your evidence about his community and directs you to take it up in the trial proceedings before the trial court, then it will be more useful for you easily challenge his false allegations and get the case dismissed.

Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 24 March 2020
I am of the considered view that offence is the best defence. A person whose base is false and fabricated should not be allowed to harass more and more and such person should be given befitting reply soon on arriving his lacuenae.

Amit Joshi (Querist) 25 March 2020
Respected Kalaiselvan sir and Makkad sir, first of all thanks for the replies. The person who filed false FIR has filed SC caste certificate to police as his caste evidence, police has asked him to submit caste validity certificate, he has not submitted it to police. Then police filed chargesheet as it is. I searched on caste validity certificate website of Maharashtra (state) which shows name of the persons who has/had applied for caste validity certificate. His name is not in search results there. Obviously, he has managed to get false caste certificate but caste validity certificate is not that much easy as it requires too much documents and sometimes investigation also. So, might he has not applied for caste validity certificate. He has made that caste certificate in 2011, supporting documents he has joined to get such caste certificate are only LC of him and his father and affadavit. Here, I want to ask that whether caste certificate has any active period of 3 years or 5 years or it is for lifetime ?

P. Venu (Expert) 25 March 2020
Yes, you may seek relief from the High Court under Section 482 CrPC if the de-facto complainant does not belong to SC/ST and he had initiated the proceedings under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on the false claim of belonging to the community.

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Expert) 25 March 2020
Unfortunately you are now coming out with contradictory information.
If you have obtained information through RTI act that he do not belong to SC community, you utilize that alone to prove your case.
Let him defend himself as per law which can be countered on the basis of the lacuna whatever you mention now.

Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 25 March 2020
Caste Validity Certificate is the basic document which gives a person right to use the said certificate. If you have evidence to the effect that after moving a complaint to the police authorities against you by the complainant, Caste Validity Certificate was demanded by concerned police authorities which has not been got provided by him to the police and the charge-sheet has been got filed without that certificate then the charge-sheet itself is erroneous. It can also be got set aside by filing a petition under section 482 of Cr. PC.

Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 25 March 2020
You may move another RTI application to the concerned authorities seeking the validity of the said caste certificate submitted by the complainant with the police authorities without having force of the Caste Validity Certificate and further whether the said certificate is genuine or fake.

Rajendra K Goyal (Expert) 25 March 2020
Try to lodge counter FIR for forgery against the person if his SC certificate is false, fabricated.

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Expert) 25 March 2020
The opinions rendered by experts above as a follow up action seems to be very much valid and effective if you follow it up scrupulously.
You have been avenged for personal enmity hence you have to fight out the injustice meted out to you as per provisions of law in your favor.

Rajendra K Goyal (Expert) 26 March 2020
Effectively and vigorously defending the case against you and also lodging counter case against the person can be good strategy in your case. You have a good ground for counter case.

Amit Joshi (Querist) 26 March 2020
Once again I want to thanks Makkad sir, Rajendra Goyal sir, Kalaiselvan sir for their expert advise. As per Makkad sir advise, I have decided to file fresh RTI application to concerned authority asking them validity of caste certificate without caste validity certificate. But as per Goyal sir and Kalaiselvan sir, filing FIR to police for false caste certificate is not possible because as per state act of caste validity certificate, I need to first complaint to District caste verification committee, the committee will conduct hearing on such false caste certificate, if they found it false, they will apply to court for getting order for registering FIR, once court give order then only FIR can be filed. This procedure is as per Section 11 of The Maharashtra
Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Denotified Tribes (Vimukta
Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special
Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance of a Verification of Caste
Certificate Act 2000. Please tell me, Is their any other way of filing FIR directly against false certificate. If not, how I know which advocate can conduct hearing of such quasi-judicial matter, I does not find any advocate in such primeses

Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 26 March 2020
Special Act supersedes the general Act. As a specific procedure has been laid down in the Maharashtra Atrocities Prevention Act, which you specifically mentioned here, you need to follow it in letter and spirit so as to get the desired results.

First move fresh RTI Application as detailed above then only follow the procedure not only with the concerned authorities but also in the Courts under section 395 of Criminal Procedure Code.

Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 26 March 2020
Directly lodging FIR is under the general provision but when a special law/enactment is there to deal with the issue then the application of general law shall be prohibited.

Rajendra K Goyal (Expert) 27 March 2020
Since there exist special law which prevents you to lodge FIR directly.
Go on writing with reminders to State Government, District Authorities, to District Caste verification officer. The case may be bit delayed, the result is bound to come.

Rajendra K Goyal (Expert) 27 March 2020
Lodge Complaint with the department of his employment with timely reminders.

In each case attach copy of the information received.

P. Venu (Expert) 27 March 2020
In opinion, the reference to the application of the provisions of the special law is misplaced, Yes there is a general dictum that special law prevails over the general law; but this is principle is restricted to similar or very same aspects dealt in the special as well the general law.

The questions in this context has been dealt with elaborately and the rule has been in laid down by the Apex Court in its decision dated 4th September 2019 in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Aman Mittal wherein, in the specific case involving the provisions of Essential Commodities Act an those of IPC it has been held that "If the offence is disclosed under the provisions of the Act, an accused cannot be charged for the same offence under Chapter XIII of IPC". The observations of the Hon'ble Court at Para 34 & 35 repay study:

"34) In the light of principles laid down, we find that Section 3 of the Act completely overrides the provisions of Chapter XIII of IPC in respect of the offences and penalties imposable for violations of the provisions of the Act, it being special Act. Therefore, if the offence is disclosed to be made out under the provisions of the Act, an accused cannot be charged for the same offence under Chapter XIII of IPC. Reading of Section 51 of the Act makes it clear that the provisions of IPC insofar as they relate to offences with regard to weight or measure, shall not apply to any offence which is punishable under the Act. Therefore, the provisions of IPC which relate to offences with regard to weight and measure as contained in Chapter XIII of IPC alone will not apply.

No person can be charged for an offence relating to weight or measure falling under Chapter XIII of IPC in view of the provisions of the Act.

35) The scheme of the Act is for the offences for use of weights and measures which are non-standard and for tampering with or altering any standards, secondary standards or working standards of any weight or measure. The Act does not foresee any offence relating to cheating as defined in Section 415 of IPC or the offences under Sections 467, 468 and 471 of IPC. Similarly, an act performed in furtherance of a common intention disclosing an offence under Section 34 is not covered by the provisions of the Act. An offence disclosing a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence which is punishable under Section 120-B IPC is also not an offence under the Act. Since such offences are not punishable under the provisions of the Act, therefore, the prosecution for such offences could be maintained since the trial of such offences is not inconsistent with any of the provisions of the Act. Similar is the provision in respect of the offences under Sections 467, 468, 471 IPC as such offences are not covered by the provisions of the Act."

The gist of the query, as I can understand, is that you have been accused of offences under SC/ST ( Prevention of Atrocities) Act even though the de-facto complainant does not belong to such community. In effect this has been a false complaint. The accused is entitled to lodge FIR and also, move the High Court under Section 482 CrPC to get the proceedings quashed.

It is the duty of the Court jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or to secure the ends of justice, there is nothing wrong in relying on the materials produced by the accused, which are of the nature of public documents or documents which from the very reading of it creates no doubt as to the existence or relevance. In this context, the rule laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Harshendra Kumar D v. Rebatilata Koley and others is quite-conclusive:

"21. In our judgment, the above observations cannot be read to mean that in a criminal case where trial is yet to take place and the matter is at the stage of issuance of summons or taking cognizance, 7 (2004) 1 SCC 691 materials relied upon by the accused which are in the nature of public documents or the materials which are beyond suspicion or doubt, in no circumstance, can be looked into by the High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 or for that matter in exercise of revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 of the Code. It is fairly settled now that while exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 or revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 of the Code in a case where complaint is sought to be quashed, it is not proper for the High Court to consider the defence of the accused or embark upon an enquiry in respect of merits of the accusations. However, in an appropriate case, if on the face of the documents - which are beyond suspicion or doubt - placed by accused, the accusations against him cannot stand, it would be travesty of justice if accused is relegated to trial and he is asked to prove his defence before the trial court. In such a matter, for promotion of justice or to prevent injustice or abuse of process, the High Court may look into the materials which have significant bearing on the matter at prima facie stage.

22. Criminal prosecution is a serious matter; it affects the liberty of a person. No greater damage can be done to the reputation of a person than dragging him in a criminal case. In our opinion, the High Court fell into grave error in not taking into consideration the uncontroverted documents relating to appellant's resignation from the post of Director of the Company. Had these documents been considered by the High Court, it would have been apparent that the appellant has resigned much before the cheques were issued by the Company. As noticed above, the appellant resigned from the post of Director on March 2, 2004. The dishonoured cheques were issued by the Company on April 30, 2004, i.e., much after the appellant had resigned from the post of Director of the Company. The acceptance of appellant's resignation is duly reflected in the resolution dated March 2, 2004. Then in the prescribed form (Form No. 32), the Company informed to the Registrar of Companies on March 4, 2004 about appellant's resignation. It is not even the case of the complainants that the dishonoured cheques were issued by the appellant. These facts leave no manner of doubt that on the date the offence was committed by the Company, the appellant was not the Director; he had nothing to do with the affairs of the Company. In this view of the matter, if the criminal complaints are allowed to proceed against the appellant, it would result in gross injustice to the appellant and tantamount to an abuse of process of the court."

Amit Joshi (Querist) 27 March 2020
Respected P. Venu sir, thank you for sharing "Harshendra Kumar D" case law, I will share this case law with my high court lawyer. I think this case law will help us. Thank you Rajendra goyal sir for your reply. You have suggested to lodge complaint to his department of employment about his false caste certificate. But as per the facts of the case, he is of general caste and working as employee as general caste. He has not shown false caste certificate to his employer and not taken job as SC employee. He has in job there from 2001 and as per his false caste certificate, he has that false caste certificate from June 2011. He has taken such false caste certificate only to file false atrocities cases. He threat people to file atrocities cases against them and done his work. We are not rich people, we are lower middle class. He think, we surrender him but we chose to fight. After this additional information, what do you think goyal sir whether complaint to his employer produce any positive output to us ?

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Expert) 27 March 2020
In my opinion there may not be any use in giving a complaint to his employer about his false caste certificate especially if he was recruited under general category and had not submitted any caste certificate to this effect.
Instead you can better challenge his case on the basis of the evidence in your hand to prove that the certificate he obtained is actually based on the false information hence he filed this criminal case against you misusing the law with motivation for wrongful gains as well as a high handed case.
It depends on how best you utilize the evidence in your hand and strongly defend your interests in this case.

P. Venu (Expert) 27 March 2020
Your primary concern and focus ought to be in your discharge from the offence alleged against you.

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Expert) 27 March 2020
Well said by Expert Mr. P. Venu.
Your primary concern and focus should be to come out of the case by challenging the false case on merits and documentary evidences in yor hand.
You will get a chance to cross examine him during trial proceedings.
You can ask him about his caste that was shown in service record with his employer and that of the one what he has produced before police now.
You can very well extract from his mouth that he produced the false community certificate by which he has intentionally filed this false complaint in order to wreak vengeance on you, hence his case is liable to be dismissed.
It depends on how properly you cross examine him during the trial proceedings as well.

Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 27 March 2020
@ P. Venu Sir! Kindly refer to your detailed reply wherein you have cited the judgment of Hon;ble Apex Court, This judgment itself shows that if there is a special enactment to deal with the offence, the sections of IPC shall not be attracted.

In the given case, though the author is facing trail under SC/ST atrocities Act but issue is not the trial rather a false certificate being used by the complainant. Whether that Caste Certificate is fake or not is to be ascertained by District Caste Validation Authority which shall constitute a committee and that committee shall call both the parties and shall conduct its proceedings as per procedure laid down and on the basis of its report, the said caste certificate shall be decided fake or genuine and prior to that the said Caste Certificate shall not be treated as fake.

There is no application of the said judgment in the aforesaid factual situation and even there is no shortcut to this settled provision.

Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 27 March 2020
So far as practical suggestion which Mr. P, Venu and Mr. T. Kalaiselvan have provided , is concerned, I am of the considered opinion that OFFENCE IS THE BEST DEFENCE. Until the fraudulent persons like the complainant are not severally punished by law, they keep on repeating such offence for their own interest and lawlessness gets prevailing in the society. After all any one shall have to come forward to chase such elements?

Author i again advised to get the certificate declared fake from the District Validation Authority and then to initiate subsequent action as already advised.

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Expert) 28 March 2020
You have a strong case to contest as well as to defend your interests properly and also to wed out this menace permanently if you taking the actions as suggested.
Our expert Mr. Makkad sir has suggested a positive step i.e., offence is the best defence.
You may equip yourself with the solid and substantial evidence to prove that this guy is a false guy with false cases and false allegations and utilise this weapon during cross examining him at the time of trial proceedings.
In fact the very knowledge of you collecting such discriminating evidences against him will make him to think about continuing the prosecution of the case.
He will get scared to even enter into the witness box to depose evidence if he is coming to know that you have collected evidences to prove that he has falsely claimed to belong to the SC community.
Hence other experts and I suggested you may better gather the evidences against him to eradicate this virus from your life for ever.

Rajendra K Goyal (Expert) 28 March 2020
Agree with the experts "Offense is the best defense"

You must proceed on the suggested line.

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Expert) 28 March 2020
You may decide after discussing with your advocate at length based on the advises received from this forum.
Take wise decision at right time.

Amit Joshi (Querist) 28 March 2020
Respected Kalaiselvan sir, I am decided to collect evidence against such guy but problem is that, I am filing RTI application to same department where he is employed. Therefore, Their is less chances of that department will supplied RTI information. They might refuse information by stating that it is personal information. Previously, I had filed to his department RTI application asking name of all the employees, caste of all that employees. And they had supplied me name of all the employees along with caste of that employees which also includes his name and his caste as GENERAL CATEGORY. Such information is certified by the that department. If I had asked them specifically about his caste then they might have informed to him about such RTI application and also they would not supplied information stating that it is personal information. Therefore, I asked them information of all the employees. While joining to govt. service employee has to submit his leaving certificate(LC). Such LC mention caste of a person. Then, I filed RTI application asking his department to provide me leaving certificate of all the employees of the department and first page of service book which mention caste of the employees. Here, again I had not asked specifically his information rather I asked information of all employees. After 45 days of such RTI application, no information is received, I filed 1st appeal. Even after 45 days of filing 1st appeal, no information is yet supplied by them. Now, I am preparing to file 2nd RTI appeal to state information commission. At proceedings of state information commission, his department might defend themselves by stating that LC and service book of employee are personal information. As per proviso to section 8(j) of the RTI ACT, "Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person". Here, I want to ask respected expert, (1) Whether can I get LC copy and service book copy of employee through RTI ?
(2) Can put forward proviso to section 8(j) of RTI ACT to counter their personal information claim ?

Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 28 March 2020
It is not understood why you have to move the proposed RTI application in the same department wherein the complaint is working. You need not to move this application there rather it should be moved to District Caste Validation Authority or with Additional Deputy Commissioner of your district who is assigned specifically by Central Government to deal with the issue of Castes.

Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 28 March 2020
It is a settled law that for seeking personal information regarding any employee of the public authority the applicant must disclose a "sustainable public interest‟. Even Section 8(1) (j) of the RTI Act was enacted to ensure that all information furnished to public authorities including personal information is not given free access to. As per this Section unless the CPIO or the State PIO or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies, the disclosure of any such information that invades the privacy of an individual is not permissible."
A reference can also be made to the judgment of the Vijay Prakash Vs Union of India & Ors W.P (C) no. 803 of 2009 01.07.2009 wherein it was held as under:

22. A private individual's right to privacy is undoubtedly of the same order as that of a public servant. Therefore, it would be wrong to assume that the substantive rights of the two differ. Yet, inherent in the situation of the latter is the premise that he acts for the public good, in the discharge of his duties, and is accountable for them. The character of protection, therefore, which is afforded to the two classes - public servants and private individuals, has to be viewed from this perspective. The nature of restriction on the right to privacy is therefore of a different order; in the case of private individuals, the degree of protection afforded is greater; in the case of public servants, the degree of protection can be lower, depending on what is at stake. Therefore, if an important value in public disclosure of personal information is demonstrated, in the particular facts of a case, the protection afforded by Section 8(1)(j) may not be available; in such case, the information officer can proceed to the next step of issuing notice to the concerned public official, as a "third party" and consider his views on why there should be no disclosure. The onus of showing that disclosure should be made, is upon the individual asserting it; he cannot merely say that as the information relates to a public official, there is a public interest element. Adopting such a simplistic argument would defeat the object of Section 8(1)(j); the legislative intention in carving out an exception from the normal rule requiring no "locus" by virtue of Section 6, in the case of exemptions, is explicit through the non- obstante clause. The court is also unpersuaded by the reasoning of the Bombay High Court, which appears to have given undue, even overwhelming deference to Parliamentary privilege (termed "plenary" by that court) in seeking information, by virtue of the proviso to Section 8(1)(j). Were that the true position, the enactment of Section 8(1)(j) itself is rendered meaningless, and the basic safeguard bereft of content. The proviso has to be only as confined to what it enacts, to the class of information that Parliament can ordinarily seek; if it were held that all information relating to all public servants, even private information, can be accessed by Parliament, Section 8(1)(j) would be devoid of any substance, because the provision makes no distinction between public and private information. Moreover there is no law which enables Parliament to demand all such information; it has to be necessarily in the context of some matter, or investigation. If the reasoning of the Bombay High Court were to be accepted, there would be nothing left of the right to privacy, elevated to the status of a fundamental right, by several judgments of the Supreme Court.

Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 28 March 2020
The basic protection afforded by virtue of the exemption (from disclosure) enacted under Section 8(1)(j) cannot be lifted or disturbed. Moreover, the Commission relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Bihar Public Service Commission v. Saiyed Hussain Abbas Rizwi: (2012) 13 SCC 61 wherein in the context of exemption under Section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act, 2005, the Court had held that exemption provided under Section 8 of the Act is the rule and only in exceptional circumstances of larger public interest the information would be disclosed.

Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 28 March 2020
The expression "public interest" has to be understood in its true connotation so as to give complete meaning to the relevant provisions of the Act. The expression "public interest" must be viewed in its strict sense with all its exceptions so as to justify denial of a statutory exemption in terms of the Act. In its common parlance, the expression "public interest", like "public purpose", is not capable of any precise definition. It does not have a rigid meaning, is elastic and takes its colour from the statute in which it occurs, the concept varying with time and state of society and its needs (State of Bihar v. Kameshwar Singh [AIR 1952 SC 252] ). It also means the general welfare of the public that warrants recognition and protection; something in which the public as a whole has a stake [Black's Law Dictionary (8th Edn.)].

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Expert) 28 March 2020
As suggested by expert Learned Shri Makkad Saab, you may not have to approach the same department for getting information through RTI act.
In fact such details are not personal hence the department is bound to give reply and cannot refuse to divulge the information especially sought through RTI act.
Since the waiting period for the first appeal i also over, you may prefer 2nd appeal as per the provisions of law in this regard.
After that you can move court against the information officer

Rajendra K Goyal (Expert) 29 March 2020
You have filed the Ist appeal and in the process to file second appeal. Department may take the defense of personal information, it can not escape the responsibility for not replying the RTI application.

Rajendra K Goyal (Expert) 29 March 2020
You also have the option to send RTI to District authorities for gathering full information in the matter.