Mumbai: Nearly six months ago, the Bombay High Court came down heavily on the Central Bureau of Investigation, which is investigating the murder of rationalists Narendra Dabholkar and Govind Pansare. “We are not impressed by the report. The agency ought to be careful as murder cases need to be initiated and concluded bearing in mind that it is a crime against society,” said Justices S C Dharmadhikari and Shalini Phansalkar Joshi in their order.
Evidently, high courts pull up the country’s premier investigating agency fairly regularly.
But to be fair, CBI’s problems are multi-fold: Vacancies are building up, State governments are not willing to spare officers, and officers with the CBI are not willing to be shifted to faraway places because the agency does not provide accommodation all the time, say police sources.
One of the sharpest criticisms against the CBI is also that it lacks the ability to conduct in-depth investigations. In the Sheena Bora murder, for instance, apart from arresting media baron Peter Mukherjea, there has been almost zero progress in its investigation, said sources in the Mumbai police. CBI’s chargesheet does not contain anything different from what was submitted by Khar police station, and it has still not traced accounts held by the accused abroad. Moreover, it is yet to prove the motive behind the murder.
D.R. Karthikeyan, former special director of the CBI, says, “CBI functions on one-third to half of its strength. Every investigating officer is supposed to have one or two cases a year. But the number of cases handled by the CBI is only increasing, year after year.”
The CBI’s motto is, ‘Industry, Impartiality, Integrity,’ but doubts are being raised on all three fronts. Does it have the teeth and the requisite manpower to deal with cases?
Manpower shortage
To begin with, there is an imbalance in the number of cases the agency is called upon to investigate and its staff strength. The CBI is the only law enforcement agency in the country that can be called in at almost free will, whether to investigate heinous crimes or track down fugitives, a function similar to that of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the United States.
Here are some high-profile ones in Mumbai that the CBI is investigating: the Sheena Bora murder case, the Adarsh society scam, filing the supplementary chargesheet in the J. Dey murder, the death of actress Jiah Khan. This apart, it also investigates deaths in police custody and is involved in tracing absconding accused in the Aurangabad arms haul case. It is also investigating 72 cases, ranging from murder to extortion and gun running, against extradited gangster Chhota Rajan. In all these cases, it is struggling to get case papers translated to English from Marathi, and importantly, find witnesses in cases dating back to the 1980s.
In March 2017, the executive ranks in the CBI, which form the backbone of all investigation, were short by 1,052 officers and men. Of the sanctioned staff strength of 5,000 officers and men, CBI had only 3,948 personnel.
Law officers who form the second crucial component, too were short by 26.75%. Of the sanctioned strength of 370 officers, CBI operates with just 271. The agency is also seriously short of technical officers who help with almost all investigation, by 56.79%. It has just 70 technical officers, where the sanctioned strength is 162.
Despite the shortfall, the number of cases the CBI has been called upon to investigate is mounting. As per data released by the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, on December 31, 2016, the CBI had 1,081 regular cases and 75 preliminary enquiries pending investigation.
‘Dumping ground’
D. Sivanandan, a former CBI joint director, says the agency has become a dumping ground. “CBI is a specialised agency and anyone who has lost faith in the local police would want a CBI investigation. The CBI is a limited task force but too many cases have been given to them.”
Asked by the Bombay High Court in 2015 to investigate the custodial death of Agnelo Valdaris, the investigating agency’s counsel said it had just nine officers in the western region, that covers Maharashtra, Goa and Gujarat.
In 2014, the Vadala railway police picked up Agnelo and three others on charges of robbery, and they were allegedly stripped, tortured and even forced to have oral sex with each other.
“We find that high-ranking officers, high ranking government servants and politicians are alleged to have committed the offence … In such cases CBI alone will be the independent agency, which can investigate the offences … We, therefore, direct the CBI to inform us whether they have adequate infrastructure and officers to carry out investigation in such matters in the State of Maharashtra,” the High Court said.
Advocate Hiten Venegavkar, a CBI counsel who appears before the HC, says matters end up before the CBI because of the failure of local police or if there is a high-profile case involving a government official where there is possibility that the state machinery may not function fairly.
While the agency is overburdened, it is not because of the offences registered under the Indian Penal Code but because of banking frauds. The investigation in these cases is technical, and therefore requires expertise manpower, both of which are limited resources as far as the agency is concerned.
“On an average, five officers are required on a case. So every expert investigating officer who is hired from banks, customs or income tax department. They are limited so they can’t handle too many cases,” he says.
The load, adds Mr. Karthikeyan, is increasing because cases are referred by higher courts and also by the government. Some cases are fast-tracked because of debates in Parliament, courts or even media attention.
“If the agency is consulted before being given the cases, it would say we cannot (get in), but they are not. The cases that come to CBI are already delayed, and they take more time. Speed of investigations is very important, and for that you need adequate manpower,” says Mr. Karthikeyan. Two things happen when there is an overload of cases. “There is enormous delay and the quality of investigation gets diluted.”
Parliamentary panel
Last year, former CBI director Anil Sinha deposed before a parliamentary committee and said the agency’s capacity to investigate was around 700 cases a year, which has almost doubled. He had emphasised the need for more officers, proposed longer tenures for officers on deputation from the State and central forces, in addition to steps to manage vacancies.
The committee’s report had stated that unless State governments provide manpower by way of sending more of their personnel on deputation to the CBI, a time would come when the CBI would collapse.
At a juncture when the country envisaged the premier investigating agency to be on par with its international counterparts, result-oriented and equipped to combat the challenges of international pressures of transnational terrorism, cyber crimes and corruption, the committee said it is disheartened that the CBI is crippled with a very basic requirement.
“The parliamentary committee is apprehensive that unless the present malady of massive vacancy is corrected immediately, the very purpose of establishment of the CBI would be eroded and its credibility tarnished,” the report said.
In September 2015, the Supreme Court said there ought to be a CBI probe into its own inability to hire, after the agency said it does not have the manpower to investigate the Vyapam scam.
The court said, “You don’t take any step to fill the vacancies and when we order a case for investigation, you throw up your hands. This is a reflection of your inefficiency.”
Hiring isn’t all that easy, though, given the bureaucratic hurdles. Mr. Karthikeyan says, “The process of hiring is very cumbersome. The shortlisted names go to the service commission and then the Personnel Ministry, the Ministry of Home Affairs. It takes months to get clearances, so the remedy is to fast-track recruitment. They should entrust CBI director with enormous powers and responsibilities. He should be given the responsibility to choose people to his organisation.”
Perhaps no one feels the decline more deeply than D.P. Kohli, the agency’s founder director. While inaugurating the 4th Biennial Joint Conference of the CBI and State Anti-Corruption Officers recently, he had a word of advice.
“The public expects the highest standard from you both in efficiency and integrity. That faith has to be sustained. The motto of the CBI must always guide your work. Loyalty to duty must come first, everywhere, at all times and in all circumstances.”
