ACB hands tied as Maha puts 374 sanctions against babus on hold

Time of India

27-04-2025

Mumbai: The Maharashtra govt has withheld 374 approvals required by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) to proceed with further inquiries and prosecutions against govt servants, revealed RTI information given by the agency. This delay has halted probes across several departments, raising questions regarding ACB's anti-graft measures.
Of the 374 pending sanctions under Section 17A of the
Prevention of Corruption Act
, over 99%, i.e. 371 approvals, have faced delays of more than 120 days, leading to speculation that this could be a deliberate strategy to shield tainted officials. The RTI reply was to queries posed by activist Jeetendra Ghadge. As mandated by a 2018 amendment to the Prevention of Corruption Act, these sanctions are essential for the ACB to even begin preliminary investigations against govt officials, establishing a two-tier sanctioning procedure.
You Can Also Check:
Mumbai AQI
|
Weather in Mumbai
|
Bank Holidays in Mumbai
|
Public Holidays in Mumbai
Former director general of police Praveen Dixit, who was also the chief of ACB, said among these cases, those awaiting prosecution after being caught red-handed by the ACB after laying a trap are the most genuine ones. "The provision of sanction in such cases should be removed as it unjustifiably protects the accused govt employee. The sanctioning authority can be managed by the accused, which eventually encourages staff to indulge in corruption. As per Supreme Court observation, if the sanction in trap cases is not given, it should be considered deemed sanction for prosecution. Unfortunately, sanction has to be given by the higher-ups, including the ministers themselves," he said.
However, sometimes, cases of inquiry over allegations of corruption against an official are too personal and levelled out of enmity, said Dixit. "Here, it is justifiable that the competent authority makes the inquiry first and then recommends the case to the ACB," Dixit added. The 2018 amendment was ostensibly designed to safeguard honest officers from vexatious harassment; however, critics contend it is now systematically leveraged to hinder bona fide corruption inquiries, said Ghadge. "These figures show a complete breakdown of accountability. The question is, what is the ACB doing if it cannot act against corrupt officials? This undermines public trust and the govt's anti-corruption promises."
A breakdown of the data reveals that the Urban Development Department (UDD) has the highest number of pending sanctions at 88, followed by Revenue Department (60), and Rural Development Department (52). "Further complicating the matter, the ACB has declined to provide data on how many sanction requests have been outrightly denied by various departments, thereby keeping the actual extent of governmental inertia unclear," stated Ghadge. Activists said the pronounced lack of transparency has sparked exasperation among citizens and anti-corruption activists. Advocate Kartik Jani from The Young Whistleblowers Foundation said, "There appears to be a clear disconnect between political commitments and administrative will. These figures expose how procedural bottlenecks and political indifference are hampering the fight against corruption."
Activists are now demanding urgent judicial and legislative reforms to curtail misuse of sanctioning powers, insisting on accountability for all officials. Ghadge added, "These amendments were done by the central govt after extensive lobbying by our bureaucrats who wanted complete protection from ACB. It seems these sanctions are now given only when a rival minister is accused of corruption. However, no sanction is given when a babu is accused. In Maharashtra, the UDD has the highest sanctions pending. What's interesting is that for several years, the same politician has been the head of UD, despite changes in govts."