The NYPD’s excuse for withholding public information about fare-evaders it arrests does not hold water, a judge ruled Monday, as he ordered the agency to cough up the data.

Cops are required by law to publish quarterly data on the race, sex, and age group of each person busted for jumping the turnstile — as well as whether they were given a desk ticket or were arrested — but have flouted the rule, claiming crooks could thwart law-enforcement efforts by using the data to track where cops are patrolling.

But New York Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron wasn’t buying it.

“The argument … that the publication of statistics of arrests and summonses issued for subway fare evasion will lead to criminals to discern police staffing patterns, is speculative at best, and improbable at worst,” Engoron said in a Monday ruling ordering the department to provide the data.

The ruling was in response to a lawsuit filed by Councilman Rory Lancman in April requesting the data under the Freedom of Information Law. Lancman has also sued to force the NYPD to post the data publicly.

Administrative Code §14-172 requires either the NYPD or MTA post the data to online.

For the first three quarters after the law was passed in December of 2017, the NYPD provided zero reports.

Currently, the NYPD only provides full numbers for the top 10 stations and less specific data for the 80 other subway stops.

The report does not include any numbers for 372 other stations, according to the councilman.

Lancman lauded the court’s ruling, saying “the Council and the public are entitled to the information they need to address racially biased policing in New York City.

“It is unacceptable that fare evasion is enforced almost exclusively against people of color, and I expect this data to help us bring about real change,” he said.

An NYPD spokeswoman said the department was working with the Law Department “to review the decision and our options.”

“Ensuring the safety of all New Yorkers comes first, and we worked diligently to release data that satisfies the intent of the legislation while taking into account security concerns,” she said.