There is an ongoing battle within the CBI between the CBI Director Alok Verma and his deputy Rakesh Asthana and both of them have been told to go on leave.
Joint Director M. Nageshwar Rao has been asked to take over charge as interim CBI Director.
How are officers at these levels appointed?
Before the Lokpal Act was enacted, the CBI Director’s appointment was done under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act.
Under this, a list of eligible candidates was prepared by a panel comprising the Central Vigilance Commissioner as chairperson, other vigilance commissioners, Home Secretary and Secretary (Coordination and Public Grievances).
The final decision would be taken following consultations between the PMO and Home Ministry.
Following the enactment of the Lokpal Act, the list is prepared by the Ministry on the basis of seniority and experience in anti-corruption investigations.
This list goes to the Department of Personnel and Training, which vets it further.
The list then goes to the Lokpal Search Committee.
It comprises of
the Prime Minister,
the Chief Justice of India (Or a representative deputed by CJI) and
the Leader of the Opposition (LoP) (If no party is large enough, the leader of the largest Opposition party can attend.)
The search committee examines the names and sends its recommendation to the government.
The decision of the committee could be unanimous or divided with a member recording a note of dissent.
The government appoints other subordinate officers in consultation with the CVC after due vetting of integrity and seniority.
What are the powers of the Director?
There is no official No. 2 in the agency — it is informally decided on the basis of seniority.
The Director remains the ultimate authority, and no other officer has any independent powers that can bypass his.
The Director has the prerogative to assign investigation of a case to an officer.
His is also the final call on the action to be taken in a case.
What is the genesis of the current crisis?
In October 2017, the CBI Director handed over a confidential note to the CVC during a panel meeting over the promotion of Asthana to the post of Special Director.
The note alleged corruption on Asthana’s part with regard to the Sterling Biotech case of August that year.
The CVC panel unanimously cleared Asthana’s promotion, disregarding Verma’s submissions.
It said the allegations were not verifiable.
In June this year, the Director targeted Asthana again, by probing him for alleged corruption.
Asthana hit back by writing to the Cabinet Secretary in August that Verma was interfering in his probes and had tried to stall a raid on Lalu Prasad in the IRCTC case.
He also alleged corruption on Verma’s part.
Less than two months later, Verma got an FIR registered against Asthana as an accused in a case of corruption.
Was sanction needed before the FIR was filed?
Section 17A of the recently amended Prevention of Corruption Act makes previous approval of the government mandatory before conducting any investigation into any offence alleged to have been committed by a public servant, where the alleged offence is relatable to discharge of his official functions/duties.
It also says, “No such approval shall be necessary for cases involving arrest… on the spot on the charge of accepting or attempting to accept any undue advantage…”
CBI has argued that since this was a case of bribery and not of abuse of official position in connection with a decision taken on policy or otherwise, this would not fall under the purview of Section 17A.
This, however, is being disputed by many.
It is being argued that since in the case against Asthana, no one was caught accepting a bribe “on the spot”, the agency should have taken permission from the government before charging him.
What are the implications?
The turf battle between the two seniormost officers has now cleaved the agency, with other officers taking sides.
The most troubling aspect is that only one of them will be proved right and either way, it is the agency that will be shown in a poor light.
The procedure for the appointment of CBI Directors, which is made by a committee comprising the PM, the CJI and the LoP, has not stripped the office of controversy.
To a large extent, the political leadership must bear the primary responsibility for such controversies.
Central agencies are seen as targeting those in Opposition parties, and these recent developments further damages their credibility.
Mr.Verma’s vehement objections about Mr.Astana’s suitability was overruled by CVC and so the CVC and the Centre to address the present crisis.
