TS struggles to attach babus’ ill-gotten assets
British-era law allows confiscation only after conviction of accused
The Telangana State, which is struggling to attach the properties of corrupt officials, needs stringent legislation on the lines of Andhra Pradesh, to confiscate ill-gotten wealth instead of just attachment of the assets. The AP Special Courts Act 2016 enables the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) to file pleas in the designated courts for confiscation of properties, where the property can be put to public use, or be auctioned before the trial.
In Telangana, ACB officials still struggle with the British-era Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance 1944 to attach properties. Under this law, property can be confiscated only after conviction of the accused, which takes an average of 10 years, till the trial is over. Moreover, in the case of attachment, properties can be still used by the accused.
In addition to the lack of a Special Courts Act, vigilance wings of various government departments in Telangana delay replying to the requests of the Anti Corruption Bureau to issue authorisation for filing pleas in ACB courts, seeking attachment of properties of corrupt officials, and permission to prosecute.
A source in the TS ACB said that in 2017, around eight attachment orders were issued. However, goir.telangana.gov.in, the official website of the Telangana government, shows that no government order to this effect has been issued in 2017.
The source said, “In 2016, we booked 12 DA cases and in 2017 we have booked around 10 DA cases so far. Attachment orders have been issued for eight cases so far and are under process in eight other cases. We are awaiting authorisation from the departments. We are yet to send in six other cases.”
In neighbouring AP, in 2017, according goir.ap.gov.in, around 13 attachment orders were issued by government departments under the Criminal Law Amendment ordinance 1944. AP will soon start using the Special Courts Act after the High Court designates courts for the purpose. In 2016, according to the ACB, around 50 DA cases were booked and this year, so far, 27 DA cases have been booked in AP, though attachments were not done in all the cases.
Legal experts and police officials point to not only the corrupt babu-friendly attitude of vigilance wings of various government departments, but also to the lack of a proper law in Telangana to penalise erring government officials.
A senior police officer said, “It is easy for the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to attach properties under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The CBI usually transfers all the cases to the ED for attachment. State agencies can also transfer corruption cases to the ED. However, the ED is overburdened with the number of cases and so states have to find their own way.” He said that the Criminal Law Amendment Act is complicated, the procedure difficult, and the process cumbersome. “TS needs an act similar to the Special Courts Act in AP, which is one step ahead of attachment where properties can be confiscated pretrial,” he added.
According to the Special Courts Act 2016, authorisation is needed from the government for filing plea for confiscation. Special designated courts can order confiscation and government takes control of the property and uses it for public purpose or auctions them.
If the case ends in an ultimate acquittal, the property will be returned, or the money from the auction will be refunded. But in attachment under the PMLA or Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance 1944, the properties can’t be alienated and it will still be in the possession of the owner and can be confiscated only after he is convicted.
Former IFS official Padmanabha Reddy, who has been fighting for quicker prosecution and attachment of properties in ACB cases, said that there are cases where the attachment process has been pending for around 10 years.
“Forum for Good Governance has given a series of suggestions to the government earlier where we have asked for a one-month cap for issuing prosecution orders and compulsory attachment of properties in DA cases till the case is disposed of. The case shall be disposed of in at least three years against the current average of court trial of 10 to 15 years in ACB cases,” he said.
Describing the manner in which cases are delayed, Mr Reddy said, “When the ACB seeks prosecution, the section officer submits a twisted note, which results in sending the case to the Tribunal For Departmental Proceedings instead of to the criminal trial in the court. The tribunal has neither a legal officer nor supporting staff. There are cases which are pending with the tribunal for the past seven to eight years. Command Area Development Authority Irrigation engineers form the biggest group booked.”