Public records preservation duty requires criminal action when a missing government file cannot be traced under the statute.

Government decision files constitute public records, and the Maharashtra Public Records Act, 2005 imposes a duty to preserve them and to act where records are unlawfully removed, destroyed or lost. The respondents could not treat the State Information Commission's direction to trace the missing file as optional or decide on their own not to lodge a complaint. Once the file could not be traced within the stipulated time, the statutory mandate required criminal law to be set in motion and the competent agency to investigate responsibility. The respondents were therefore bound to implement the Commission's direction, including registration of the criminal case, and their non-compliance was unjustified.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondents were bound to comply with the State Information Commission's direction to trace the missing file and, if it could not be traced, to set criminal law in motion under the Maharashtra Public Records Act, 2005.

Analysis: The information sought related to a government decision and the connected file was treated as a public record. The Maharashtra Public Records Act, 2005 required preservation of such records and imposed a duty to take action on unauthorised removal, destruction or loss of public records. The Court held that the respondents could not avoid compliance by treating the Commission's direction as a mere expectation or by unilaterally deciding that no complaint should be lodged. Once the record could not be traced within the stipulated time, the statutory mandate and the Commission's order required criminal law to be set in motion and responsibility to be investigated by the competent agency.

Conclusion: The respondents were bound to implement the Commission's direction, including registration of the criminal case, and their failure to do so was not justified.

---