CJI on Credibility of CBI

In Context

• Chief Justice of India said CBI’s credibility has come under deep public scrutiny with the passage of time as its actions and inactions have raised questions in some cases.

Major issue Highlighted 

• The Chief Justice of India listed several issues that were affecting the system. 
  • They included lack of infrastructure, sufficient manpower and modern equipment; in-human conditions, especially at the lowest rung; questionable methods of procuring evidence; officers failing to abide by the rule book; and lack of accountability of erring officers.
  • The issues leading to delay in trials were lack of public prosecutors and standing counsels; seeking adjournments; arraying hundreds of witnesses and filing voluminous documents in pending trials; undue imprisonment of undertrials; change in priorities with the change in the political executive; cherry picking of evidence; and repeated transfers of officers leading to a change in the direction of probe.
  • These issues often lead to the acquittal of the guilty and incarceration of the innocent. 
  • This severely affects the public trust in the system. The courts cannot simply monitor every step.

Suggested Reforms /Recommendations

• Creation of Independent umbrella institution:
  • There was an immediate need for the creation of an independent umbrella institution, so as to bring various central agencies like the CBI, Enforcement Directorate and the Serious Fraud Investigation Office under one roof.
    • This body is required to be created under a statute, clearly defining its powers, functions and jurisdictions. 
• Independency: 

• The organisation should be headed by an independent and impartial authority, appointed by a committee akin to the one which appointed the CBI Director. 
• Its head could be assisted by deputies having specialisation in different domains.

• Multiple Proceeding: 
  • This umbrella organisation will end multiplicity of proceedings.
  • A single incident these days gets investigated by multiple agencies, often leading to dilution of evidence, contradiction in depositions, prolonged incarceration of innocents.
  • End in multiplicity of proceedings will also save the institution from being blamed as a tool of harassment. 

• Once an incident is reported, the organisation should decide as to which specialised wing should take up investigation

• Check & Balance: 
  • A reasonable check and balance would be a provision in the proposed law for annual audit of the institution’s performance by the appointing committee.
• Cooperation between the Police and  investigative agencies:
  • Police and the investigative agencies may have de-facto legitimacy, but yet, as institutions, they still have to gain social legitimacy.
    • Police should work impartially and focus on crime prevention. 
      • They should also work in cooperation with the public to ensure law and order prevails in the society.
    • Institutions including the Police and the investigative bodies should not allow any authoritarian tendencies to creep in and need to function within the democratic framework as any deviation will hurt them and will weaken our democracy
  • The State agencies must be equipped to deal with increasing challenges in the field of investigation. 
  • There should be a harmonious relationship between the State and Central agencies and collaboration was the key, given that the goal of all those organisations was to secure justice.
• Representation of women:
  • There was a need for adequate representation of women in the criminal justice system.

•  Upgradation of knowledge:
  • There is a need for regular upgradation of knowledge, deployment of state-of-the-art technology, and international exchange programmes to learn the best practices.

Source:TH