A job is a job, and the CBI has done it remarkably well over the years, though it has come under political pressure in several instances. The fodder scam case is a good example of the probe agency's efficiency
The fodder scam had its origins long before the matter fell into the CBI’s lap. It had been on for decades already when, in 1996, the Supreme Court upheld the orders of the Patna High Court that the case should be investigated by the CBI and monitored either by the Chief Justice of Patna High Court or a Bench constituted by him. The public interest litigation on the fodder scam was filed in 1990 by Bihar’s anti-corruption department, but it remained in limbo, because it would open an hornet's nest for the high and mighty.
On September 30, as many as 45 accused in the fodder scam were convicted, including former Bihar Chief Ministers lalu Prasad and Jagannath Mishra. This is a unique example of two Chief Ministers, belonging to rival political parties, being convicted in one case. Apart from lalu Prasad and Mishra, Janata Dal (United) leader and Jahanabad MP Jagdish Sharma as well as three formers IAS officers have been convicted.
This only goes to underline the all-pervasive nature of the scam, in which politicians of different hues collaborated with bureaucrats to siphon off public money. In the case at hand, the money had been earmarked for the Animal Husbandry Department to be spent on fodder and medicines for livestock.
Only two fodder scam cases are being tried in Bihar. The other 53 cases are in the jurisdiction of Jharkhand. Of these, 46 have been disposed and nine are pending. There are a total of about 600 accused, out of which 550 have been convicted. It will be worthwhile to recall the landmarks of this case and how it was delayed.
January 1996: Fodder scam surfaces after Deputy Commissioner of Chaibasa finds that the animal husbandry department is embezzling funds.
March 1996: Patna High Court directs the CBI to investiagte the scam. The CBI registers an FIR in the Chaibasa treasury case. The Bihar Government appeals to the Supreme Court to let the case remain with Bihar Police. The appeal is rejected.
June 1997: CBI completes its investigation and files a charge-sheet naming lalu Prasad as an accused.
July 1997: lalu Prasad surrenders before the CBI court and is sent to judicial custody.
October 2001: Supreme Court transfers fodder scam cases to Jharkhand, after the creation of the new State.
February 2002: Trial begins in the special CBI court in Ranchi.
August 2013: Supreme Court rejects lalu Prasad’s plea to transfer the case from the trial court judge on the ground that the presiding officer is related to a Minister who is inimical to him,
September 30: lalu Prasad, Misra and 43 others are convicted by the CBI trial court.
I have been pursuing this case for long and have been lampooned and criticised for my zeal, not to mention that I have come under pressure from the highest levels of the Government. But I have just ignored it all.
An investigation is a painstaking job. But the CBI has to do it. And it is not left to a Sub-Inspector, Assistant Sub-Inspector or Head Constable. Under the law, CBI investigators have to be of the rank of either an Inspector or a Deputy Superintendent of Police. In my entire career, I have never told any investigator to work with a vengeance to prove or disprove a case.
The conviction rate in the fodder cases has been over 90 per cent. This is a rare occurrence and should be an eye-opener that the Indian law enforcement system is capable of handling complicated tasks, provided it is allowed function effectively.
Apart from some black sheep — and some of them are senior officers — in the CBI who stonewalled my investigative efforts, I also had to deal with the political class and its ‘Oust Joginder’ campaign. In April 1997, Prime Minister IK Gujral took me to task for carrying out a “witch-hunt”, and lashed out at me for indulging in “publicity-oriented” probes. He said that some people were being “prosecuted” even before their cases had reached the courts.
“I think the publicity-oriented investigation is something we have to prevent”, he explained. He went on to add, “And publicity sometimes gives me the impression that there is really some sort of exhibitionist trend in the personalities who think that it is more important for the public to know what they are doing.” And the Prime Minister said this while he was criticising corruption in public life at a Chief Ministers’ conference. While he did not mention me by name, the indirect reference to the fodder scam, which was in the news at that time, was unmistakeable.
He took up the matter with me, and for talking to the Press, in a one-on-one meeting. I told him that I would tell the media what had been done and cannot be undone, but never what CBI would be doing. He laughed and agreed with me. Irrespective of the official stand and his being occasionally annoyed with me, there was a certain amount of cordiality and respect that we had for each other. I appreciated his political compulsions and he understood my legal and also personal compulsions.
Without my having to say much, it is worthwhile for the discerning readers to judge where I went wrong. I claim no personal credit for the conviction of any accused in fodder scam. After all, every action has a cause, and what we are seeing today is the result of what we did yesterday. It is the team-work of everybody, right from the constable to the Director, and those that were determined to bring the case to its logical conclusion.
Hardships, obstacles and difficulties are natural in any worthwhile task, though any police job is unpleasant. The CBI has played a tremendous role in sending messages to the dishonest bureaucrats and the corrupt politicians; “Beware. Big Brother is watching you.” It is, therefore, no wonder, that several people are upset over the functioning of the CBI when the probe agency does its job well.
A job is a job, and the CBI has done it remarkably well over the years, though it has trodden on many a corn. My transfer for taking the decision to charge-sheet the high and mighty involved in the fodder scam was a small price that I paid. A Press reporter asked me on my transfer to a nondescript post at an airport on my return from Interpol. I smiled and said with a mischievous smile, “Wonderful, same salary and no work!”
I paid the price as a humble public servant in the interest of probity and ethics, in the interest of the country. The conviction and sentencing of lalu Prasad and Rajya Sabha member Rasheed Masood, effectively leading to their disqualification from the House, is a good beginning.