Who’ll probe the top probing body
2 Oct 2014 12:14 AM GMT
A slew of reports, some of them even instigating vehement denials, have now cast doubt on the very motto that Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) stands for: industry, impartiality and integrity. It seems the top probing agency is spending more time and energy issuing vociferous denials in response to the number of newspaper articles that directly or indirectly involve its top bosses, current and former.
Not only have been the alleged links between tainted meat seller and hawala operator Moin Qureshi and CBI director Ranjit Sinha talked about in the power circuits of the national capital, they have also reached the gates of Supreme Court and made an impression there under the stewardship of AAP leader and advocate Prashant Bhushan. It is now widely known in the public sphere that the Income Tax department has been in possession of 500 hours of conversation as well as BBM chat transcript linking Kanpur-based Qureshi with former CBI chief AP Singh.
In addition, there’s also Ranjit Sinha’s 2 Janpath visitors’ diary which attests to reportedly scam-scarred individuals frequenting the famed official residence of the CBI chief all too often, more than 90 times in the last 15 months. Despite all these pointers indicating the possible stink in CBI quarters, somehow the persons facing allegations have, so far, only faced minor social embarrassment at most. Even the Supreme Court’s order to Ranjit Sinha, asking him to explain his situation or step down, has been, effectively, countered by turning the charges against the petitioner himself, with the controversial onus of revealing the whistleblower’s name, much to everyone’s dismay.
Given that CBI, the topmost probing agency in this country, itself is under scanner, how best to go about it? Who will investigate the alleged inconsistencies and ineffective probes undertaken by the CBI under the aegis of its current and a former director? Perhaps a Supreme Court-monitored Special Investigation Team (SIT) could be the answer, but inasmuch as the examination will still need elaborate police probes, who will be in charge? Shouldn’t the authorities come clean first and then carry on with routine investigations into various scams, particularly Coalgate, 2G spectrum, among others. Why, despite a Supreme Court ruling that no fresh chargesheets or closure reports could be filed by CBI until the Sinha issue was resolved, has no special panel been formed to look into the matter? What the Indian public needs the least is to have a tainted probing body at the helm of affairs as far as the sensitive and highly confidential investigations are concerned.
Not only have been the alleged links between tainted meat seller and hawala operator Moin Qureshi and CBI director Ranjit Sinha talked about in the power circuits of the national capital, they have also reached the gates of Supreme Court and made an impression there under the stewardship of AAP leader and advocate Prashant Bhushan. It is now widely known in the public sphere that the Income Tax department has been in possession of 500 hours of conversation as well as BBM chat transcript linking Kanpur-based Qureshi with former CBI chief AP Singh.
In addition, there’s also Ranjit Sinha’s 2 Janpath visitors’ diary which attests to reportedly scam-scarred individuals frequenting the famed official residence of the CBI chief all too often, more than 90 times in the last 15 months. Despite all these pointers indicating the possible stink in CBI quarters, somehow the persons facing allegations have, so far, only faced minor social embarrassment at most. Even the Supreme Court’s order to Ranjit Sinha, asking him to explain his situation or step down, has been, effectively, countered by turning the charges against the petitioner himself, with the controversial onus of revealing the whistleblower’s name, much to everyone’s dismay.
Given that CBI, the topmost probing agency in this country, itself is under scanner, how best to go about it? Who will investigate the alleged inconsistencies and ineffective probes undertaken by the CBI under the aegis of its current and a former director? Perhaps a Supreme Court-monitored Special Investigation Team (SIT) could be the answer, but inasmuch as the examination will still need elaborate police probes, who will be in charge? Shouldn’t the authorities come clean first and then carry on with routine investigations into various scams, particularly Coalgate, 2G spectrum, among others. Why, despite a Supreme Court ruling that no fresh chargesheets or closure reports could be filed by CBI until the Sinha issue was resolved, has no special panel been formed to look into the matter? What the Indian public needs the least is to have a tainted probing body at the helm of affairs as far as the sensitive and highly confidential investigations are concerned.
Next Story
