SC asks CBI to disclose ‘success rate’ in prosecuting cases

Observing that the “success rate” is an empirical tool and an important indicator, the bench added: “We are saying this with our experience; a lot more is required to be done.”

The Supreme Court on Friday directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to give an account of its “success rate” in prosecuting cases across the country while underscoring that the “premier investigating agency” cannot simply launch prosecutions and then not bother about their outcome.

The court was hearing a matter arising out of the CBI’s appeal from a 2018 judgment of the Jammu & Kashmir high court.

A bench of justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh said that it is important to know the extent of success of the CBI in cases where investigations and prosecutions have been carried out by the agency because there has to be some accountability as well.

“We want a complete chart of how many cases you have been prosecuting in trial courts and in the high courts. We will examine the success rate of the premier investigating agency. Also tell us how many cases have been pending in different courts and for how long. Let an analysis be done,” the bench told additional solicitor general Sanjay Jain, who was appearing for CBI.

The ASG, however, sought to dispute the proposition on the success rate of the agency. “In an adversarial system where the accused also have rights to be defended, is the success rate really important?” he asked.

The bench retorted in affirmation. “Yes, indeed. Such assessments are done all over the world. If you have no case, what is the fun in launching an investigation or a prosecution. Let us not forget that investigation is the most important part of a trial, and you are supposed to be the premier investigating agency,” it told Jain.

Observing that the “success rate” is an empirical tool and an important indicator, the bench added: “We are saying this with our experience; a lot more is required to be done.”

With the writing on the wall, the ASG pleaded for sufficient time to collect the relevant data. The bench gave him six weeks to do so.

The court was hearing a matter arising out of the CBI’s appeal from a 2018 judgment of the Jammu & Kashmir high court. By this judgment, the high court let off some lawyers from the charges of fabricating false evidence against a few security forces personnel to frame them in a case of rape and murder. While the two girls from Shopian had died due to drowning in March 2009, the CBI claimed, some lawyers and doctors created false evidence of rape and murder to implicate personnel of security forces.

However, it took CBI more than a year to file its appeal against this order. In January, the top court sought an explanation from the department noting the delay in filing the case “shows clearly gross incompetence in the legal department of the CBI which raises serious questions of its efficacy to prosecute the case”.

When the agency submitted its explanation for the delay in February, the bench was livid and called it “a saga of gross negligence in performing duties while asking, this time, the CBI director to file his personal affidavit as to what steps are being taken to ensure proper functioning of prosecution of legal cases.

Subsequently, then CBI director Rishi Kumar Shukla filed his affidavit in March 2020 apologising for the inordinate delay in filing the appeal. The director pointed out that a new set of instructions with stipulated timelines have been issued to streamline the process of filing and monitoring of appeals filed by the agency. The affidavit stated that “not only the responsibility of in-house officers has been fixed for strict processing of the matter within timeline but they have also been tasked with coordinating with the ministries so that appeals may be filed within the prescribed time limit.”

On Friday, the bench perused the affidavit of the former CBI director’s director but asked the ASG about the number of cases the agency has been prosecuting and the conviction rate.

“You have to put your house in order. At the same time, you submit details of the cases pending in the trial court and the high court along with the cases where you have succeeded. You give us the year-wise data on this. Let us see how you have done,” it told the law officer.

HT reached out to CBI officials but they were not available immediately for a response.