Jharkhand HC Slams ACB Over 211 Pending Corruption Probes, Seeks Report

The Jharkhand High Court has strongly criticized the state's Anti-Corruption Bureau for delaying 211 corruption investigations. Chief Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan's bench rejected the ACB's excuses about workload and staff shortages. The court emphasized that such delays seriously undermine public trust in the anti-corruption system. It has now directed the ACB Director General to personally submit an affidavit explaining the reasons for delays and providing completion timelines.

Key Points: Jharkhand High Court Raps ACB Over 211 Corruption Case Delays

  • Court rejects ACB's workload and staff shortage excuses for investigation delays
  • 211 corruption preliminary inquiries remain pending out of 613 total cases
  • Bench emphasizes delays undermine public confidence in anti-corruption system
  • Court directs ACB DG to personally file affidavit with completion timelines
2 min read

Jharkhand HC raps ACB over delay in 211 corruption probes, seeks report from DG

Jharkhand High Court expresses strong displeasure over 211 pending corruption probes, directs ACB DG to submit affidavit explaining delays and completion timeline.

"The ACB was created precisely to handle such inquiries and ensure swift action against corruption - Jharkhand High Court Bench"

Ranchi, Oct 22

The Jharkhand High Court on Wednesday expressed strong displeasure over the pendency of more than 200 preliminary inquiries (PEs) at the state’s Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB).

The court directed the agency’s Director General to submit a detailed affidavit explaining why there is so much delay and when the probes will be completed.

A division bench headed by Chief Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, while hearing a suo motu public interest litigation, observed that it was a matter of serious concern that out of 613 preliminary inquiries registered with the ACB, 480 have been disposed of, while 211 cases remain pending for a long period.

The bench said the state’s premier anti-graft agency cannot cite workload or shortage of staff as excuses for delays in corruption investigations.

It also remarked that the ACB was created precisely to handle such inquiries and ensure swift action against corruption, adding that any delay undermines public confidence in the system.

During the hearing, a Deputy Superintendent of Police submitted an affidavit on behalf of the ACB, claiming that the bureau was burdened with confidential verifications, intelligence gathering, and a large number of ongoing investigations, which had caused delays in disposing of pending cases.

The court, however, rejected this explanation. It said that such justifications cannot be accepted.

It further noted that arguments citing the retirement or death of officials under investigation were equally untenable.

The court said the responsibility of the ACB does not cease merely because the concerned officer has retired or passed away. Each inquiry must reach its logical conclusion to ensure transparency and accountability.

The High Court has directed the ACB Director General to personally file an affidavit detailing the timeline for completion of the pending inquiries.

The matter has been posted for the next hearing on November 6.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priya S
As a citizen of Jharkhand, I've seen how corruption affects our daily lives. When anti-corruption agencies themselves become part of the problem, where do common people go? The court's intervention is much needed.
A
Aditya G
While I appreciate the HC's stance, let's be practical - the ACB might genuinely be understaffed. Fighting corruption requires proper resources. The government should ensure adequate staffing and infrastructure. 🤔
S
Sarah B
The argument about officials retiring or passing away being a reason to drop cases is ridiculous! Corruption doesn't retire with the officer. The court is absolutely right - investigations must reach logical conclusions.
V
Vikram M
This is why people lose faith in the system. When corruption cases drag on for years, it sends a message that you can get away with anything. Hope the November 6 hearing brings some concrete action plan. 🇮🇳
M
Michael C
Working in governance sector, I understand both sides. But 211 pending cases is excessive. The ACB needs better case management and prioritization. Maybe digital tracking systems could help speed up the process.

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50