Corruption in Odisha seems to have an upper hand over the pro-active Vigilance. Despite sustaining heat on the crooks, Odisha’s babus appear very competitive as they propelled the State to the dubious top five leagues with more arrests under the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA) in the country.
While Odisha is second to Karnataka with most Class - I officers in Vigilance net, the number of netted-in Class-II officers managed to figure in the top-5 nationally.
The reason that bolsters their confidence in looting is the acquittals in the court of law in Odisha are more than the convictions. In the year 2014, when 84 cases saw conviction, a high of 95 cases got acquittals. Rubbing salt on the injury, as many as 18 cases were abated due to death of the person arraigned of corruption. This is not a year of aberration. Data available since 2001 recorded a trend of this sort.
From 2001-2010, the State saw 341 convictions with the acquittals numbering at a whopping 654. Similarly, the period 2011-2013 recorded around 240 convictions to around 300 acquittals. Cases abated due to death of accused in the last decade were around 90.
What worries the State Vigilance is the poor rate of conviction in even ‘trap’ cases, which legal experts describe an ‘open and shut’ case. Statistics shed light on the Vigilance’s plight. During the period 2001-2014, the Department charge sheeted over 1,400 trap cases for trial but a handful of little over 350 cases were convicted.
The vulnerability looks more pronounced when the convictions have been at mere around 200 against over 1,000 charge sheeted cases under other corruption acts for the same period. The rate looks more pallid in the all-important cases of ‘Disproportionate Assets’ (DA), purportedly against big fishes, with mere 46 convictions against charge sheets on over 520 cases during the said time-period.
Sources in the Vigilance further reveal the shocker. In about three-dozen cases, the sentences range from imprisonment of 1 year to 3-years and fines ranging from mere Rs 4,000 to Rs 1 lakh only. More so, if convictions against public servants come after their retirement then the punishment seems more of academic import than deterrence against corruption, rued sources.
However, the Vigilance Department officially patted on its back by pointing out that of the 368 PCA cases, around 44 per cent cases were ‘trap’ ones, which show common people have faith on Vigilance as ‘trap’ cases require a formal complaint unlike the DA cases.
However, interestingly, Odisha recorded fewer DA cases in the country. Instituting a DA case requires swift collation of inputs, meticulously tracking and above all professional investigation, which is not the case here, alleged senior advocate Nishikant Mahapatra. More so, the technical wing of the Vigilance Directorate in State doesn’t have auditors and high ranking revenue officials to sniff the DA cases better, he added.
Another shocker is by December last, around 1,200 cases are still pending for investigation indicating how positioned staff strength does not suffice the load generated in the State. Senior IPS officer Amrit Prasad observed the need to mandate a fixed time-frame for the investigating officer to complete the investigation.