Central Bureau of Investigation

Special Police Establishment

The Bureau of Investigation traces its origins to the Special Police Establishment (SPE), a Central Government Police force, which was set up in 1941 by the Government of India to investigate bribery and corruption in transactions with the War and Supply Department of India.^[6] It had its headquarters in Lahore. The Superintendent of the SPE was Qurban Ali Khan, who later opted for Pakistan during the Partition of India.^[9] The first legal adviser of the War Department was Rai Sahib Karam Chand Jain. After the end of the war, there was a continued need for a central governmental agency to investigate bribery and corruption by central-government employees. Sahib Karam Chand Jain remained its legal advisor when the department was transferred to the Home Department by the 1946 Delhi Special Police Establishment Act.^[6]

CBI directors

Unconstitutional status

This section needs to be updated. (August 2017)

Gauhati High Court had given a verdict on 6 November 2013 that CBI is unconstitutional and does not hold a legal status.^[13] However, the Supreme Court of India stayed this verdict when challenged by the central government and the next hearing on this is fixed on 6 December 2013.^[14] It continues to derive its powers from Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946.^[15]

Demand for greater autonomy

Demanding independent investigations, the CBI said that although it deferred to the government's authority in non-corruption cases, the agency felt that sufficient financial and administrative powers were required by the director (including a minimum three-year tenure to ensure "functional autonomy"). "As such, it is necessary that the director, CBI, should be vested with ex-officio powers of the Secretary to the Government of India, reporting directly to the minister, without having to go through the DoPT", the agency said, adding that financial powers were not enough and it wanted a separate budget allocation.^[16]

Appointment Committee and Selection committee

The CBI Director is appointed, for not less than a term of two years, by the Appointment Committee on recommendation of Selection Committee as mentioned in DSPE Act 1946 amended through the Lokpal & Lokayukta Act 2013 and CVC Act, 2003^[17] respectively. The Appointment Committee consists of:

• Prime Minister – Chairperson
• Leader of Opposition of Loksabha or the Leader of the single largest opposition party in the Lok Sabha, if the former is not present due to lack of mandated strength in the Lok Sabha - member
• Chief Justice of India or a Supreme Court Judge recommended by the Chief Justice – member

The Selection Committee constituted under Delhi Special Police Establishment Act 1946 nominates a certain number of names to the Appointment Committee, one among whom the Appointment Committee appoints as the CBI director. The Selection Committee consists of:^[18]

The NDA government, on 25 November 2014, moved an amendment bill to do away with the requirement of quorum in high-profile committee while recommending the names for the post of director CBI to the central government by introducing the clause "no appointment of a (CBI) director shall be invalid merely by reason of any vacancy or absence of members in the panel" and to replace the Leader of the Opposition (LOP) with the leader of the single largest opposition party or pre-election coalition.^[19]

Infrastructure

CBI headquarters is a ₹186 crore (US$21 million), 11-storey building in New Delhi, housing all branches of the agency. The 7,000-square-metre (75,000 sq ft) building is equipped with a modern communications system, an advanced record-maintenance system, storage space, computerised access control and an additional facility for new technology. Interrogation rooms, cells, dormitories and conference halls are provided. The building has a staff cafeteria with a capacity of 500, gyms, a terrace garden, and bi-level basement parking for 470 vehicles. Advanced fire-control and power-backup systems are provided, in addition to a press briefing room and media lounge.^[20]

Hierarchy

Officers:^[23]

• Director
• Special Director
• Additional Director
• Joint Director
• Deputy inspector general (DIG)
• Superintendent of Police (SP)
• Additional Superintendent of Police (Addl.SP)
• Deputy superintendent of police (Dy.SP)

Subordinates:

• Inspector
• Sub-Inspector (SI)
• Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI)
• Head constable (HC)
• Constable

Investigation of corruption cases

The CBI is the primary investigative agency for corruption cases involving Central Government employees under the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act) and the Delhi Special Police Establishment (DSPE) Act. However, the scope of its jurisdiction has been subject to legal interpretations.

In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court held that the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB), a state anti-corruption agency, also possesses the authority to investigate corruption cases involving Central Government employees within the state. The court reasoned that neither the PC Act nor the DSPE Act explicitly prohibits state agencies from investigating such cases.

This ruling underscores the complexities surrounding the jurisdiction of investigative agencies in corruption matters. While the CBI holds primary responsibility, state anti-corruption agencies may also possess concurrent jurisdiction in certain circumstances, depending on the specific provisions of relevant legislation and judicial interpretations.

The High Court observed that neither the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA) nor the Delhi Special Police Establishment (DSPE) Act of 1946 explicitly prohibits state anti corruption agencies or state police from investigating corruption cases involving Central Government employees. Moreover, neither act grants exclusive investigative authority to the CBI, the Central Vigilance Commission, or any other Central Government entity.^{[27][28][29][30]}

The court , therefore, held that “the VACB, being a specially constituted agency to investigate bribery, corruption and misconduct mainly under the PC Act is always clothed with the authority to investigate offences involving corruption that take place within the State, whether it is committed by a Central government employee or a State Government employee.^[31][32]

Relationship with state police

The CBI was originally constituted under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act to operate within the territory of Delhi. As policing and law is a subject that falls within state powers under the structure of Indian federalism, the CBI needs prior consent from other state governments in order to conduct investigations within their territory. This consent can be in the form of a 'general consent' under Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, which remains in operation for all investigations until it is revoked, or alternatively, a 'specific consent' authorising investigations in individual cases.^[33][34] Once consent is granted, the CBI can investigate economic, corruption, and special crimes (including national security, drugs and narcotics, etc.)^[34]

Most Indian states had granted general consent to the CBI to investigate crimes within their territory. However, as of 2020, several states have withdrawn their 'general consent' for the CBI to operate, and require a special consent to be granted on a case to case basis. In November 2018 West Bengal government withdrew general consent for the CBI to investigate, and accused the Central Government of using federal agencies to destabilise state politics.^[35] Andhra Pradesh restored general consent in 2019.^[36] Chhattisgarh and Maharashtra have given general consent to the CBI after elections.^[37] In November 2020, Kerala, Jharkhand, and Punjab withdrew general consent to the CBI.^[38][39][40]Mizoram had previously withdrawn general consent to the CBI as well.^[41][40] Meghalaya withdrew consent in March 2022,^[42] and Tamil Nadu withdrew consent in June 2023, and Karnataka in 2024. Altogether, eight states require prior consent before the CBI can investigate crimes in their territory.^[26]

High Courts and the Supreme Court

The High Courts and the Supreme Court have the jurisdiction to order a CBI investigation into an offence alleged to have been committed in a state without the state's consent, according to a five-judge constitutional bench of the Supreme Court (in Civil Appeals 6249 and 6250 of 2001) on 17 February 2010. The bench ruled:

Being the protectors of civil liberties of the citizens, this Court and the High Courts have not only the power and jurisdiction but also an obligation to protect the fundamental rights, guaranteed by Part III in general and under Article 21 of the Constitution in particular, zealously and vigilantly.

— Five-judge constitutional bench of the Supreme Court of India, ^[43]

The court clarified this is an extraordinary power which must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and only in exceptional situations.^[43][44]

Exemption from Right to Information (RTI)

CBI is exempted from the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005. This exemption was granted by the government on 9 June 2011 (with similar exemptions to the National Investigation Agency (NIA), the Directorate General of Income Tax Investigation and the National Intelligence Grid (Natgrid)) on the basis of national security. It was criticized by the Central Information Commission and RTI activists, who said the blanket exemption violated the letter and intent of the RTI Act.^[7] The exemption was upheld in Madras High Court.

Corruption

In 2013, Judge of the Supreme Court of India (and later Chief Justice of India) R. M. Lodha criticized the CBI for being a "caged parrot speaking in its master's voice", due to its excessive political interference irrespective of which party happened to be in power.^[51][52]

Because of the CBI's political overtones,^[53] it has been exposed by former officials such as Joginder Singh and B. R. Lall (director and joint director, respectively) as engaging in nepotism, wrongful prosecution and corruption. In Lall's book, Who Owns CBI, he details how investigations are manipulated and derailed.^[54] Corruption within the organisation^[55][56] has been revealed in information obtained under the RTI Act,^[57] and RTI activist Krishnanand Tripathi has alleged harassment from the CBI to save itself from exposure via RTI.^[58] The states that have withdrawn consent to the CBI have accused the CBI of being a tool used by the Union Government to unfairly target parties ideologically rivaling them.^[42]

Political interference

Normally, cases assigned to the CBI are sensitive and of national importance. It is standard practice for state police departments to register cases under its jurisdiction; if necessary, the central government may transfer a case to the CBI. The agency has been criticised for its mishandling of several scams.^[59][60][61] It has also been criticized for dragging its feet investigating prominent politicians, such as P. V. Narasimha Rao, J. Jayalalithaa, Lalu Prasad Yadav, Mayawati and Mulayam Singh Yadav; this tactic leads to their acquittal or non-prosecution.^[62]