SHILLONG: With a total of 8 graft cases registered and investigated sans conviction since 1996, the State Government’s effort to firmly deal with the corruption cases involving public servants have proved to be a futile exercise.
In reply to RTI questions by The Shillong Times, the State CID said that a total of eight cases were registered till date by the CID ‘s Anti -Corruption Branch under Prevention of Corruption Act 1998. Out of the 8 cases, two ended in final report (nothing was proved) and out of this, one case was not followed up due to the death of the accused.
Out of the 8 cases, only four were chargesheeted and the same number of persons were prosecuted. However, their conviction is awaited as the cases are under trial.
While the first case was probed in 1996, the last case registered under the Prevention of Corruption Act was in 2014.
There are concerns about the absence of autonomy of the Anti-Corruption Branch as it is not an independent body.
Police have admitted that the Anti Corruption Branch cannot initiate inquiry on its own.
“The process of launching an ACB inquiry is that the political department of the State Government initiates direction to the head of ACB to start inquiry and submit findings to the Government”, the reply of the CID official said.
Moreover, “Findings of the Inquiry are submitted to the political department which then decides whether to carry out criminal investigation or not”.
While police maintained that there is no need for the ACB to seek permission from the Chief Secretary who is the State Vigilance Commissioner, the political department maintained that a vigilance cell has been set up with the Chief Secretary as the State Vigilance Commissioner, who looks into the complaints of the corruption against any public servant . The political department, however, added that the State Vigilance Commission has not been set up in the State.
Though the RTI reply mentions that there is no State Vigilance Commission, the Meghalaya Government website says that there is a State Vigilance Commission headed by the State Vigilance Commissioner who is appointed by the Governor. “The State Vigilance Commission enjoys the same measure of autonomy as enjoyed by the Meghalaya Public Service Commission. The Vigilance Commission can cause an enquiry or investigation to be made into any complaint or corruption or mis-conduct on the part of a public servant. It may also formulate proposals for the prevention and control of corruption”, says the Meghalaya Government portal under section “About Meghalaya”
A letter of the then Commissioner and Secretary, political department G.P.Wahlang, addressed to various heads of the department in 2001 said that ” State Anti-Corruption Branch under the control of the Chief Secretary as the State Vigilance Commissioner has been functioning in the Political Department”
According to the letter, all complaints of corruption, and misconduct of public servants which required investigation by the State Anti-Corruption Branch should be referred to the State Vigilance Commissioner by all concerned departments, and officers.
“On the order by the State Vigilance Commissioner, the cases and complaints will be enquired into by the Anti-Corruption Branch of the State police department under the over-all supervision by the Inspector General of Police (CID)”, the letter said.
Moreover, the direction said that all enquiries and reports by the Anti-Corruption Branch of the state police will be submitted by the Inspector General of Police (CID) to the State Vigilance Commissioner for further necessary action.
