THE Central Bureau of Investigation, whose functioning has been governed by a highly restricting law, the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, has proposed a bill that would truly make it an independent, unified central government agency to undertake prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of offences related to subjects in the Union List of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution.

An autonomous CBI has been the demand of citizenry for a long time. Several Parliamentary committees have recommended empowering of the CBI by freeing it from the constraints of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act. Under the present law, the CBI has to obtain consent of the states to investigate offences in their jurisdictions. Often the states challenge the powers of the Supreme Court and high courts to order CBI probe without their consent.
The proposed legislation would expand the jurisdiction of the CBI to states for the prevention, investigation and prosecution of offences included in the Schedule II and the concurrent list of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. Such offences would include, apart from those under the Indian Penal Code, those under Explosive Substances Act, Anti-Hijacking Act,  Drugs and Cosmetics Act, the Official Secrets Act, the Mines and Minerals Act, the Passport Act, the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, the Registration of Foreigners Act, the Railways Act, the Information Technology Act, the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and the Prevention of Corruption Act. In all, the Schedule I and II of the draft Act include 53 classes of offences under various Acts over which the CBI wants to have an all-India jurisdiction.
The CBI registers an average of 1,500 cases every year and has a conviction rate ranging between 65 and 70 per cent, ranked to be among the highest even by global standards. The CBI remains several notches above the state agencies as far as its performance is concerned. The Supreme Court trusts it. Not long ago, the Supreme Court ordered a CBI probe into the alleged fake encounter of Sohrabuddin Sheikh and bumping off his wife Kauserbi and an accomplice in Gujarat. The apex court came down heavily on the Gujarat government for failing to conduct impartial investigations and attempting to “mislead” the apex court by filing conflicting action taken reports (ATRs). “From the above factual discrepancies appearing in eight ATRs and from the chargesheet, we feel that the police authorities of the state of Gujarat had failed to carry out a fair and impartial investigation as we initially wanted them to do. It cannot be questioned that the offences the high police officials have committed was of grave nature which needs to be strictly dealt (with),” the apex court said.
Yet, the new legislation must make the agency truly independent, because there are several cases of corruption and other crimes involving politicians and civil servants that the CBI has not been allowed to handle with a free hand. In many cases, the central government’s consent has been denied in starting a case. Then there have been many tell-tale cases of the CBI buckling under the pressure of the government of the day in the politically sensitive cases, such as the Taj Corridor Scam involving the UP Chief Minister, Ms Mayawati and the Fodder Scam involving the former Bihar chief minister, Mr Lalu Prasad. The CBI has been found on occasions changing its positions in the apex court, raising serious doubts about its credibility.
There were also doubts raised when the CBI overlooked the orders of the court to include the charge of abetment of suicide in the chargesheet in the Ruchika case. The CBI was seen to be helping Rathore to bail himself out. The special judicial magistrate, Mr Jagdev Singh Dhanjal wanted the abetment of suicide to be included in the chargesheet, but the CBI refused to do it. The inclusion of this charge eventually at higher court’s instance only gives room for suspicion that the agency was going soft on Rathore. It is necessary therefore that the new legislation provides for not only full autonomy for the CBI but also enough government resources to make it fully professional, so that no room is left for doubt in the public mind about CBI’s role in any case. After all, despite its actions in several sensitive cases coming under suspicion, the CBI retains its credibility and can regain public trust with independent functioning.