In a stinging indictment of Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the Supreme Court has once again questioned the independence of the country’s premier anti-corruption agency. The “caged parrot” barb was hurled back at the CBI as the apex court granted bail to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal on Friday.
While the two-judge bench was in agreement on the question of bail, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, in his order, questioned the timing of Kejriwal’s arrest by CBI. “CBI is a premier investigating agency of the country. It is in public interest that CBI must not only be above board, but must also be seen to be so. Not long ago, this court has castigated the CBI comparing it to a caged parrot. It is imperative that CBI dispels the notion of it being a caged parrot. Rather, the perception should be that of an uncaged parrot,” Justice Bhuyan said.
Kejriwal was arrested by the CBI in the excise policy case on June 25, 2024. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Kejriwal’s lawyer, had called this an “insurance arrest” arguing that the CBI decided to arrest Kejriwal since he was all set to walk out in the ED case.
Justice Bhuyan on Friday observed, “Every effort must be made to remove any perception that investigation was not carried out fairly and that the arrest was made in a high-handed and biased manner. In a functional democracy governed by the rule of law, perception matters. Like Caesar’s wife, an investigating agency must be above board.”
Deja Vu for CBI
The observations from the SC on Friday were a re-run of May 2013. Hearing the coal scam case, the SC had then castigated the CBI for being a “caged parrot” and “its master’s voice”.
Justice RM Lodha had highlighted “clear evidence of interference in the CBI probe into alleged irregularities in the allocation of coalfield licences to private companies.”
“The CBI has become a caged parrot speaking in its master’s voice. It is a sordid saga that there are many masters and giving unbridled power to the CBI is not possible. The CBI has become the police force and is in the administrative control of the Central government. CBI investigations have to be independent,” Justice Lodha had said.
The observations had given more ammunition to BJP-led opposition to attack the UPA on corruption charges.
A decade later, the INDIA front opposition leaders have accused the BJP of misusing the CBI and compromising its independence.
CBI’s defence
The CBI officially didn’t react to the SC observations. Agency sources, however, pointed out that the investigating team did not rush to arrest Kejriwal and approached court for custody only when new evidence emerged.
“The decision for custodial interrogation was taken by probe team after fresh evidence emerged from Goa about not just knowledge but also direct involvement of Kejriwal in the hawala money trail for AAP Goa election funding,” sources said.
The CBI had first summoned Kejriwal in April 2023 and subjected him to 9 hours of questioning. Sources said the focus of investigation then was the missing excise policy files and the manner in which the decision was taken.
In June 2024, the agency again questioned the Delhi CM in Tihar Jail before seeking court permission for arrest. Sources said that by this stage, K Kavitha’s arrest, confessions by AAP Associates in Goa and confessions by Mangutha Reddy had thrown up fresh evidence about the role played by Kejriwal allegedly in ensuring profit for the south group through Delhi liquor licence and generating bribe money through hawala channels to fund AAP’s elections.
CBI’s independence
Delhi Minister Saurabh Bhardwaj slammed Union Home Minister Amit Shah after the SC’s question mark on CBI’s independence. “After today’s decision of SC, I think Home Minister should resign after what SC said on central agencies as they come under his ministry,” Bhardwaj said.
The Delhi Police Special Establishment Act, however, gives the MHA no legal authority over CBI. The CBI, formed under this act, was given more cushion by the SC in the the Vineet Jain case. The Central Vigilance Commission has supervisory authority over the CBI. The DOPT is the administrative ministry for the agency. The Director has 2 years fixed tenure after being selected by a panel of PM, CJI and LOP. However, through an executive order in 2023, the government made provisions of giving extension to CBI Director for up to 5 years.
This was also criticised by the opposition as a measure which would make the CBI subservient to government hoping to get an extension after the original 2 year tenure ends. The government, however, had justified the move in the interest of supervisory continuity in sensitive cases that the CBI and ED probe.
Comments
0 comment