The petitioner sought disclosure of information under section 138(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 relating to tax evasion proceedings initiated against his father-in-law, pursuant to a complaint filed by the petitioner. The stated object of seeking such information was to establish the “real truth” in larger public interest and to use the information as evidence in criminal proceedings under section 498A of the IPC arising out of matrimonial disputes between the petitioner and his ex-wife. The petitioner had already been furnished limited information by the Income-tax Department under the Right to Information Act, 2005, including the broad outcome of the enquiry conducted pursuant to his tax evasion petition. The application under section 138(1)(b) was rejected by the Principal Director of Income Tax (Investigation) on the ground that the information sought did not involve any public interest. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed a writ petition before the Telangana High Court contending that the order was cryptic and that disclosure was necessary in public interest to enable him to defend himself in the criminal proceedings. The Hon’ble Telangana High Court dismissed the writ petition and upheld the rejection of the application. The Court observed that the petitioner was seeking disclosure of information relating to tax evasion proceedings against a third party for the purpose of using it as evidence in a criminal trial arising out of a personal matrimonial dispute. Such disclosure, beyond what had already been furnished under the RTI Act, could not be said to fall within the ambit of “public interest” as contemplated under section 138(1)(b) of the Act. The Court held that disclosure of further information relating to tax proceedings against an individual, particularly for use in private criminal litigation, is impermissible and does not serve public interest. The impugned order was found to be reasoned and not suffering from non-application of mind. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed.(AY. 2013-14)