CBI Autonomy Bill: Who is behind this Separate Law For CBI & What is the Bill ?
Here is the Draft Bill and Complete Link, and Court Order Download link ,
In a Recent NEWS The " Madras High Court Directs Centre To Enact Separate Law For CBI "
Actually in a Tweet M Nageswar Rao IPS (R) Stated that :
"Madras High Court Directs Centre To Consider Making Separate Law For CBI; Ensure Its Autonomy. See the Draft Bill submitted by me to Govt. Hope it receives favourable consideration of Govt."
Madras High Court Directs Centre To Consider Making Separate Law For CBI; Ensure Its Autonomy.— M. Nageswara Rao IPS(R) (@MNageswarRaoIPS) August 18, 2021
See the Draft Bill submitted by me????to Govt.
Hope it receives favourable consideration of Govt. https://t.co/kguktCSjiw
The Draft Bill
One more State is beyond #CBI with Maharashtra withdrawing general consent.— M. Nageswara Rao IPS(R) (@MNageswarRaoIPS) October 22, 2020
CBI is on shaky legal foundation.
As I/C DCBI, I proposed????amendment of DSPE Act, 1946 to give legal foundation to realise @narendramodi Ji commitment to root out corruption.@CVCIndia@PMOIndia@HMOIndia pic.twitter.com/048d8aKs1J
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Tuesday observed that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) should be made more independent like the Election Commission of India and the Comptroller and Auditor General of India.
Notably, the Court directed the Central Government to consider bringing a separate Act giving statutory status with more powers and jurisdiction to CBI at the earliest. It may be noted that the CBI is at present constituted as per an executive notification under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act. The Gauhati High Court, in 2013, had quashed the said notification and held the CBI's formation to be unconstitutional. The Supreme Court stayed the High Court order, which is still continuing. Taking into consideration that the public reposes enormous faith and trust in CBI, the premier investigative agency, a Division Bench of Justices N. Kirubakaran and B. Pugalendhi passed a slew of directions and observed that the instant order 'is an attempt to release the "Caged Parrot" (CBI). "Caged Parrot" is a term used by the Supreme Court to describe the CBI in 2013. "CBI is a caged parrot speaking his master's voice", a bench headed by the then CJI RM Lodha had observed then.
• Government of India is directed to consider and make a decision for the enactment of a separate Act giving statutory status with more powers and jurisdiction to CBI at the earliest.
• CBI shall be made more independent like the Election Commission of India and Comptroller and Auditor General of India.
• Separate budgetary allocation shall be made for CBI.
• Director of CBI shall be given powers as that of the Secretary to the Government and shall directly report to the Minister/Prime Minister without going through DoPT.
• Central Government shall make CBI independent with functional autonomy without administrative control of the Government.
• CFSL shall have more modern facilities and should be augmented on par with the facilities available to the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the United States of America and Scotland Yard in the United Kingdom.
• DoPT is directed to pass orders on the CBI restructuring letter dated 09.09.2020 after consulting with other departments if necessary, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
• CBI should file a well thought out policy within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, for permanently recruiting (i) Cyber Forensic experts and (ii) Financial Audit experts, so that all the branches/wings of CBI should have these experts available with them and not on case to case basis.
• DoPT should clear all the pending proposals pertaining to CBI's infrastructure development e.g. land construction, residential accommodation, up-gradation of available technical gadgets etc., within a period of six weeks.
• CFSL attached to CBI should clear all the pending cases as of 31.12.2020. Similarly, other FSLs should also offer their Forensic opinion pending as of 31.12.2020 within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
• The details of cases wherein charges have not been framed by the Trial Courts despite the charge sheets having been filed by CBI for more than one year, should be shared by the Director, CBI with the respective Registrar Generals of the High Courts.
• Since CBI itself has stated in reply to Para 'O' that CBI has to work within the constraints of shortage of manpower, Director, CBI should send another detailed proposal seeking a further increase in the divisions/wings, as well as strength of Officers in CBI to the Government of India within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and Government of India, should pass orders on the same within a period of three months of its receipt.