61 probe requests by CBI in graft cases still pending, reveals data

NEW DELHI: An amendment in the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act four years ago, to insert section 17A and make it mandatory for agencies to seek prior permission before initiating corruption probes against public servants, appears to be turning into a hurdle for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the premier anti-corruption agency.

As per the data accessed by HT, 61 requests of the CBI against 130 public servants were pending with various ministries and departments, including public sector banks and public sector units since 2018.

Most requests – 21 out of a total of 61 requests – sent by the central agency are pending with various banks who, CBI officials allege, do not cooperate with the agency. Canara Bank tops the list with seven such requests pending before it, followed by Indian Bank (six), Punjab National Bank (five), Central Bank of India (two) and Union Bank of India (one). “On one hand, the banks send us complaints against defaulters, as per directives of the government and RBI. On the other hand, they sit on our requests for prior permission to initiate a probe, or prosecution sanction to file a charge sheet. They basically use the CBI as a strongman to scare defaulters so that their money is recovered without penal action,” a CBI officer said.

Other departments, ministries or state governments which haven’t so far responded to CBI’s letters seeking probe against their employees are the Delhi government, which has three requests against eight public servants, department of personnel and training, department of revenue, department of financial services, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, National Highways Authority of India, Union ministries of defence, communication, railways, civil aviation, education, health and family welfare, Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan governments, Indo-Tibetan Border Police and Delhi high court, among others, data showed.

Majority of these requests have been lying with the concerned departments for over a year and in a few cases, for more than three years.

This is despite section 17A making it mandatory for the ‘concerned authority’ to convey its decision, approval or denial, within three months of issuance of a CBI request, which can be extended by only one month. Officials believe Section 17A is an additional hindrance for the CBI.

MOST REQUESTS – 21 OUT OF A TOTAL OF 61 REQUESTS – SENT BY THE CENTRAL AGENCY ARE PENDING WITH VARIOUS BANKS