In Brief
The Supreme Court held that Rule 151 of the Gujarat High Court Rules, which requires third parties to file affidavits stating reasons for seeking certified copies of court documents, is not inconsistent with the Right to Information Act, 2005. Where an existing statutory mechanism (High Court Rules) provides access to information through a simple procedure, the RTI Act provisions need not be invoked. The non-obstante clause in Section 22 of the RTI Act gives it overriding effect only against substantive inconsistencies, not procedural differences. Information on the judicial side is personal to litigants; requiring reasons for access prevents misuse and allows courts to assess bona fide needs. The appeals were dismissed, confirming the High Court's order requiring use of established High Court Rules rather than RTI for obtaining certified copies from court proceedings.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.