History repeats as Farce

Invariably, the rich man gets out of jail, while the penniless gets hanged. Indian prisons are full of such 'criminals'
Hardnews Bureau 

Probes by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) usually follow a predictable pattern. The investigations, initially, hold great promise when the case is handed over to the agency. In between, it generates great excitement when the CBI leaks information against the accused or about the case to a gullible media. In majority of the politically sensitive cases, the last phase sees the agency failing to file its charge sheet within the stipulated time period and is thereby forced to release the accused. 
Such a predictable farce is enacted time and again, thus eroding the credibility of India's premier investigating organisation and also feeding this impression that the CBI can only manipulate, but never convict the rich and powerful. The failure of the agency to book the guilty contributes in picking holes in the resolve of successive governments to have zero tolerance for corruption and crime. 

There is a litany of cases that would lend credence to this allegation. Beginning from the long winding probe into the Bofors Howitzer deal to the infamous Jain Hawala scandal and now to the more recent Telgi counterfeit stamp paper scam, there is evidence of conscious botch up and failure to put evidence on record. The Arushi murder case stands unresolved, after a flurry of goof-ups, arrests and leaked stories, with allegations that some influential people have allegedly sidetracked the probe. 

There are politically sensitive cases like the probe into the demolition of Babri Masjid, the corruption of Lalu Prasad Yadav and Mayawati, among other political heavyweights. The interest of the CBI is shown to wax and wane, political observers' claim, according to their political fortunes. Their case never dies, but never come to an early conclusion also. So when Mulayam Singh Yadav needs to be sorted out politically then the investigation in his disproportionate assets case is speeded up. A similar treatment is meted out to Mayawati, too. 

This does not mean that the charges of corruption levelled against them are not correct; but the conduct of the CBI dilutes the public perception about the gravity of the charge. "The investigation is a political gimmick/conspiracy," is a common refrain.

It is this lack of manifested fairness that opens up CBI to the charge that it is controlled by the party in power. Although the CBI chief was given security of tenure and the agency was made immune from any political interference by husbanding it with the Central Vigilance Commission after the Supreme Court directive in the wake of the Jain Hawala Scandal, but nothing much has been achieved since then. 

The agency has given enough evidence that it can do a great job when they are not mandated to save or prosecute any one, but such cases usually are those that do not have a political or big corporate interest. Many high value cases like the investigation in the Rs 3,200 Harshad Mehta securities scam, or even the counterfeit stamp paper Telgi scam are examples of how the probe was not taken to its logical conclusion. 

Take for instance the securities scam that hit headlines in 1992-93. The CBI booked brokers, bankers, but not businessmen or politicians. The action taken report on the securities scam could not show the end use of the money lost in the scam. The reason for this reluctance was obvious: the agency did not have the spine to trace these riches to some of the business houses who were being represented by the Bombay Bull. There was evidence then that these business houses that were represented by Mehta showed ruddy balance sheets even when there was no increase in sales of their products or any fund infusion.