A serial offender

A serial offender

Government should note, CBI’s investigative adventurism mars several cases not just one.

The Central Bureau of Investigation continues to make headlines for the wrong reasons. Soon after it booked Chanda Kochhar, former head of ICICI Bank, on charge of criminal conspiracy in connection with disbursal of a loan, it attracted criticism from government. Arun Jaitley, minister without portfolio, was unimpressed by CBI’s FIR that wants the role of bankers, other than Kochhar, probed. Jaitley feels this is more a case of investigative adventurism than professional investigation. Jaitley’s criticism is limited to the ICICI Bank case. However, a look at CBI’s record in some other high profile cases shows that adventurism is a serial problem.

Two characteristics of investigative adventurism, according to Jaitley, are a tendency to cast the net too wide and being unconcerned about criminal intent. These flaws show up in other cases too. Notably, in the 2G telecom spectrum case where a special court judge was critical of CBI’s efforts. In another case, the Aarushi Talwar murder, Allahabad high court found fault with CBI and went on to acquit the accused. In many cases, reputations are irreversibly damaged during the course of CBI’s drawn out investigations. But CBI’s incompetence not only harms individuals, it also extracts a toll on the economy as it can freeze decision making in government.

Jaitley believes poor conviction rates are because adventurism and megalomania overtake investigators. It’s a worrisome state of affairs as CBI is India’s premier investigative agency with a specific mandate of tackling corruption. Experience of countries with a stellar reputation in this regard indicates that successful conviction acts as a significant deterrent. Moreover, CBI’s impartiality has been questioned by almost all political parties when not in power. The agency’s reputation encapsulates the problem with an important part of the justice system. It needs to shape up.