The Central Bureau of Investigation is again in the news. With the filing in court of its (second) “closure report” in the case of Jagdish Tytler, it has become the cynosure of suspicion. Could it have been a mere coincidence (people say) that the “closure report” came hard on the heels of Tytler getting a ticket from the ruling Congress party to contest the ensuing general elections?

This raises a fundamental question — how independent is the CBI? Experience shows that it is as independent as the incumbent director of the CBI wants it to be — the director now has a fixed two-year tenure.

Structurally the CBI is under the control and direction of the administrative ministry in charge, which is the Department of Personnel and Training in the Government of India: the act under which the CBI is set up (The Delhi Special Police Establishment Act 1946) provides (Section 4) that it must function under the “superintendence” of the Central government. When exercising investigatory powers into offences under the Code of Criminal Procedure, however, the word “superintendence” does not have its ordinary meaning viz “superintend, direct and control”. The word has a special meaning — especially since the decision in Vineet Narain (1998) which held that Section 4 cannot be construed so as to permit supervision of the actual investigation of a criminal offence by the CBI and the Central government is precluded (by judicial diktat) from issuing any direction to the CBI to curtail or inhibit its jurisdiction to investigate into offences.

... contd.