We reviewed the blog post outlining your legal battle with the Uttar Pradesh Information Commission. In many cases such as this, justice delayed & truth suppressed becomes a real concern. Here are the key points regarding Appeal No. S-09/A/1037/2025:

• Documentary evidence as an alibi: Email records show the appellant logged into the Microsoft Teams lobby. This login occurred at 12:00 PM on 12 January 2026. These records were accessed at 12:54 PM.
• The appellant was present digitally. Commissioner Shakuntala Gautam’s official order sheet, however, recorded the appellant as “absent” during the hearing.
• Misleading Information from the SPIO: SPIO Mumtaz Ahmad provided a misleading RTI response. He cited the flawed paper “absence” report. He suppressed the requested digital server logs.
• Systemic Failure of the “Lobby Trap”: The case highlights how virtual courts can exclude citizens. This happens when staff fail to admit them from the digital lobby. Staff subsequently mark them absent.
• Active Pursuit of Justice: The appellant has formally challenged these discrepancies. I filed the First Appeal (Registration No: UPICM/A/2026/60029) with FAA Tejaskar Pandey on 27 February 2026.
• Recommendations for Activists: The post advises RTI users to always create timestamped email alibis. Engage in this activity while waiting in digital lobbies. They should specifically request “Server Metadata” to prevent vague official responses.

Justice Delayed & Truth Suppressed: The Struggle for Accountability in the UP Information Commission

The Right to Information (RTI) Act of 2005 is a citizen’s strongest weapon. However, systemic failures now threaten this foundation of democracy. This situation clearly shows how justice may be delayed and how easily people can suppress the truth. The case of Justice Delayed & Truth Suppressed is particularly evident here. This case involves Appeal No. S-09/A/1037/2025. It reveals how procedural errors and misleading reports can stall justice.

---

The Genesis: Seeking Public Accountability

The journey began with an RTI application about medical negligence. Though searching for answers, the appellant encountered the consequences of delayed justice and suppressed truth while seeking information. The appellant sought six points of information from CHC Vindhyachal. A medical officer there had missed a bone fracture during an initial exam.

The Public Information Officer (PIO) denied the request. He incorrectly invoked Section 11(1) to protect “third-party” data. This forced the appellant to approach the State Information Commission, hoping that justice postponed and fact concealment would not prevail.

---

The Digital Divide: The 12 January 2026 Hearing (Justice Delayed & Truth Suppressed)

The Commission scheduled a virtual hearing for 12 January 2026. The appellant prepared a detailed written statement. He submitted it two days before the hearing. The process was plagued by the risks of justice being delayed. There was also the suppression of truth.

Proof of Digital Presence

Records show that the appellant was active that day. This provides evidence that contradicts any notion of delayed justice or hidden truths.

• 09:36 AM: The appellant emailed his written statement to the Commission.
• 12:00 PM: He logged into the Microsoft Teams meeting lobby.
• 12:54 PM: He sent an urgent email to the court coordinator.
• He stated he had been waiting in the lobby for nearly an hour.

Despite this “digital footprint,” the official order sheet told a different story. State Information Commissioner Shakuntala Gautam recorded that both parties were absent. This certainly reflects how delay can affect justice. It shows how bureaucratic proceedings can suppress the truth.

---

Core Issue 1: Clerical Errors vs. Electronic Evidence (Justice Delayed & Truth Suppressed)

The Commission’s order marked the appellant as “absent”. Consequently, it issued a “final opportunity” notice under Rule 9(1)^. One can see justice postponed and truth not acknowledged in this faulty procedure.

This error is a major procedural failure. It shifts the burden of “non-appearance” onto the citizen. The appellant was actually waiting at the court’s digital door. The Commission’s staff failed to admit him. Their mistake created a false narrative of a lack of interest. This reflects the classic cycle of justice delayed. Truth is often suppressed in such cases.

---

Core Issue 2: The PIO’s Misleading Strategy

The appellant filed a new RTI (Registration No: UPICM/R/2026/60101). He asked for the “online hearing attendance log” to prove his presence. Moreover, He aimed to counteract delays in justice. He also sought to address the suppression of truth.

SPIO Mumtaz Ahmad responded on 26 February 2026. His reply was an exercise in administrative evasion:

• The Evasive Referral: He did not provide the digital server logs.
• The Loophole: He merely referred back to the “absence” report from Room-9.
• Suppression: He used a flawed paper record to hide the appellant’s 12:00 PM login. This is another sign of justice delayed. It also indicates truth suppressed within this administrative process.

This response violates Section 7(1) of the RTI Act. The information provided was misleading and incomplete. In short, justice was delayed and truth unfortunately suppressed yet again.

---

The Legal Counterstrike: The First Appeal

The appellant filed a First Appeal (Registration No: UPICM/A/2026/60029). He submitted this on 27 February 2026 to FAA Tejaskar Pandey. The appeal rests on three pillars, each intended to overcome justice delayed and expose truth suppressed:

1. The Electronic Alibi: Emails from 09:36 AM and 12:54 PM prove his participation.
2. The Demand for Metadata: He demands actual server logs that no one can “edit”.
3. Accountability: He seeks an inquiry into why the SPIO ignored electronic records.

---

Conclusion: The Path Forward

This case highlights “The Lobby Trap.” Virtual courts exclude citizens when gatekeepers fail to admit them. Marking them “absent” afterwards adds insult to injury, truly illustrating justice delayed & truth suppressed for ordinary citizens.

The struggle of Yogi M. P. Singh shows that RTI is about integrity. The First Appellate Authority now faces a vital choice. Will the Commission trust its server logs? Or will it hide behind flawed paper records? This will continue the cycle where justice is delayed and truth is suppressed.

---

Key Takeaways for RTI Activists (Justice Delayed & Truth Suppressed)

• Timestamp Everything: If you wait in a digital lobby, email the court immediately. This ensures the record can’t show delayed justice. It also prevents suppressed truth.
• If you find that they wrongly marked you absent, file a correction of the record. Taking this step ensures justice. It also helps in preventing the suppression of truth.
• Be Specific: Always ask for “Server Metadata.” This will prevent vague PIO answers. It will also avoid any suppression of truth or delay in receiving justice.

Next Step: I can draft a formal Rejoinder to the PIO’s Response. This will ensure your email timestamps become part of the permanent record in Room S-09. Should we begin? Ensuring justice delayed and truth suppressed do not remain the outcome is essential.

Based on the documents provided, here are the specific identification and contact details for the public authorities and your related cases:

Application and Appeal IDs

• RTI Registration Number: UPICM/R/2026/60101.
• First Appeal Registration Number: UPICM/A/2026/60029.
• Second Appeal Number (Court S-09): S-09/A/1037/2025.
• Second Appeal Number (Court S-05): S05/A/1286/2025.
• Second Appeal Registration Number: A-20250301434.
• Notice Number: 202512509N300996.

Public Authority Contact Details (Justice Delayed & Truth Suppressed)

Authority / Officer	Role	Mobile / Phone	Email
Mumtaz Ahmad	SPIO / Administrative Officer	915180XXXX	jansu-section[dot]upic[at]up[dot]gov[dot]in
Tejaskar Pandey	First Appellate Authority (FAA)	9415021746	deputysecretary-upic[at]up[dot]gov[dot]in
Shakuntala Gautam	State Information Commissioner (S-09)	Not provided	hearingcourts9.upic@up.gov.in
Padum Narayan Dwivedi	State Information Commissioner (S-05)	Not provided	hearingcourts5.upic@up.gov.in
U.P. Information Commission	Main Office	0522-2724945	Not provided
PIO, CMO Mirzapur	Respondent (Medical Case)	Not provided	cmomzp@gmail.com
PIO, Mirzapur	Respondent (Electricity Case)	9450963598	ee.2mirzapur@puvvnl.in

Web Links and Digital Details (Justice Delayed & Truth Suppressed)

• UPIC Official Portal: https://upsic.up.gov.in/.
• Online Hearing Link (S-09): https://upsic.up.gov.in/cispu/onlinehearing/335701.
• Notice Download Link: https://upsic.up.gov.in/cispu?viewNoticeSms/d65f20.

Would you like me to help you draft a formal notice to the Registrar of the Commission regarding the technical issues with these links?