Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)

Posted 22 Aug 2024

Updated 29 Aug 2024

5 min read

Why in the News?

Recently, Supreme Court in State of West Bengal v. Union of India case (2024) upheld the maintainability of West Bengal government’s suit against the Union over registration and investigation of cases by CBI despite revocation of its general consent in 2018.

Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)

Genesis: Established in 1963 on recommendation of Santhanam Committee on Prevention of Corruption (1962-64).
Ministry: Ministry of Personnel, Pension & Public Grievances.
Status: Non-statutory and Non-constitutional body. It is governed by Delhi Special Police Establishment (DSPE) Act, 1946.
About: Premier investigating police agency in India, which coordinates investigation on behalf of Interpol Member countries.
Motto: Industry, Impartiality and Integrity.
Vision: Combating corruption in public life, curbing economic and violent crimes through meticulous investigation and prosecution; fight cyber and high technology crime etc.
Composition: Headed by Director (assisted by special director or an additional director), joint directors, deputy inspector generals, superintendents of police and all other usual ranks of police personnel.
- In 2021, President promulgated two ordinances to extend the tenures of Directors of CBI and Enforcement Directorate (ED) for up to five years, from fixed tenure of two years.
Types of cases investigated by CBI: Anti-corruption, Economic offences, Special crimes and Suo-moto.
Consent of State for CBI
- General: CBI is not required to seek fresh permission every time it enters that state in connection with investigation or for every case.
  - Section 6 of DSPE Act empowers state government to give or deny consent to CBI officer.
  - Apart from West Bengal, other states like Punjab, Telangana etc. have also withdrawn their general consent.
- Specific: CBI would have to apply to the state government in every case.

Common Cause vs Union of India, 2019: SC held that Central Government shall appoint CBI Director on recommendation of Committee consisting of
- Prime Minister (Chairperson).
- Leader of Opposition recognized as such in Lok Sabha or where there is no such Leader of Opposition, then, Leader of single largest Opposition Party in that House (Member).
- Chief Justice of India (CJI) or Judge of SC nominated by CJI (Member).
CBI v. Dr RR Kishore, 2023: SC declared that its 2014 judgment in ‘Subramanian Swamy versus Director, CBI and another’ case, which declared Section 6A of DSPE Act 1946 as unconstitutional, will have retrospective effect. This means that Section 6A is held to not be in force right from the date of its insertion.
CPIO CBI versus Sanjiv Chaturvedi, 2024: Delhi High Court held that Section 24 permits disclosure of information regarding allegations of human rights violations and corruption and exemption provided to scheduled organisations does not totally exempt CBI from purview of RTI Act.
Vineet Narain v Union of India (1997): Commonly called the Jain Hawala Case—SC had struck down the 1969 “Single Directive” of the Union Government, a consolidated set of instructions issued to the CBI by various ministers on the modalities of initiating and registering cases.

Concerns associated with CBI

Vacant posts: Vacancies in executive ranks, law officers etc. of CBI are not being filled up at the required pace, thereby increasing pendency of cases, hindering operational efficiency and investigative capabilities.
- For instance, total of 1709 posts are vacant in CBI against its sanctioned strength of 7295 as of March 2023. (Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law And Justice report)
Lack of transparency: Details of cases registered with CBI, progress made in their investigation and related final outcome are not available in public domain.
Withdrawal of Consent: Considering provisions of DSPE Act (Section 6), consent of State government is a prerequisite for any investigation making its investigation dependent upon sates approval.
- Nine States have withdrawn the general consent, hampering investigation of cases.
Loss of credibility: CBI has been criticised for its mismanagement of several cases involving prominent politicians and mishandling of several sensitive cases like Bofors scandal, Hawala scandal, etc.
Administrative hurdles: For conducting inquiry or investigation on Central Government employees (Joint Secretary level and above), prior approval of Central Government is required, hindering its capacity to combat corruption at higher levels of bureaucracy.
Funding issues: Inadequate investment in personal, training, equipment or other support structures, and underutilisation of funds, adversely hampers effectiveness of CBI.
Lack of autonomy: CBI operates under the administrative control of Department of Personnel and Training and government's significant role in appointing senior officials, raises concerns about agency's independence.

Way ahead

Recommendations of Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law And Justice
- Director of CBI should monitor the progress made in filling up of vacancies on quarterly basis.
- Maintain a case management system which would be a centralised database (accessible to the general public) containing details of cases registered with it and the progress made in their disposal.
- Need to enact a new law and define the status, functions and powers of CBI and lay down safeguards to ensure objectivity and impartiality in its functioning.
- Percentage of officers inducted through deputation at level of Inspector of Police be restricted to 10% and 40% officers may be recruited through Direct Recruitment/Limited Departmental Competitive Examination.
- Publish case statistics and annual reports on its website.
- State's consent clause' should be removed only in such cases that are considered to be a threat to nation's security and integrity.