Vigilance department and Police Act

. K.Karunanidhi vs State Of Kerala on 10 February, 2020

Vigilance Department had time and again issued orders prescribing the procedure relating to enquiries to be conducted. Exts.P5 to P7 are orders issued prescribing the procedure relating to functioning of the Vigilance Department. From Ext.P7, it will be clear that the Vigilance Department was not an independent machinery, as claimed by the Government, free from political interference. On 26.03.1997 name of the Directorate of Vigilance was changed as Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau. Ext.P8 is the Government Order showing that fact. Later, 3 rd respondent, as per Ext.P9, accorded sanction for creation of additional posts WP(C) Nos.18325 of 2015 & in the Vigilance Department. Petitioners contended that the Vigilance Department was considered to be a distinct and separate entity and had nothing to do with the police force in the State. Merely some police officers from the State police force were absorbed by deputation into the Vigilance Department, those officials could not be termed as police officers competent to register crimes, conduct investigation, effect arrest of an offender and to submit a final report.

19. Gist of the averments in the counter affidavit are as follows:Writ petitions are not legally and factually maintainable. Ext.R1(a) marked in the counter affidavit is same as Ext.P3. Under Section 3 of the Police Act, 1960 the State Government is empowered to constitute a separate wing to discharge the functions of a police officer as provided by the Code. To strengthen the then existing vigilance machinery in the State and for more effective investigation into cases involving allegations of corruption and misconduct on the part of public servants and also taking into consideration the recommendations of Sanathanam Committee, the Government had changed the X Branch of the police as a separate vigilance division under a separate Director vide Ext.R1(b) (same as Ext.P4). In 1975, the vigilance division was renamed as Vigilance Department vide Government letter No.5520/A1/75/Vig dated 27.08.1975. A copy of circular No.6/75 dated 02.09.1975 based on the above Government letter is Ext.R1(c). Nomenclature of the Vigilance Department was subsequently changed to VACB vide Ext.R1(d) (same as Ext.P8). VACB is a specialised agency of the Government of Kerala designed to combat and control corruption among the public servants. Invested with wide investigative powers derived from the statutory provisions and Government/departmental orders, VACB undertakes investigation of cases registered under the PC Act and any offence under other Acts committed in the same transaction. It conducts enquiry into WP(C) Nos.18325 of 2015 & complaints of misconduct and misdemeanour on the part of public servants. VACB functions under the over all control and supervision of a Director, who is of the rank of Director General of Police. Work of VACB is closely monitored and supervised by the Vigilance Department under the Additional Chief Secretary to the Government, Home and Vigilance. Procedure relating to investigation and enquiry conducted by VACB are spelt out in various Government Orders. Ext.R1(e) and R1(f) relate to the procedure to be followed by VACB. A unit of VACB functions in each of the 14 districts in the State. A Dy.SP. heads the unit. Each unit is notified by the Government as a police station under Section 2(s) of the Code. As per Ext.P11 notification dated 04.12.2000, the buildings at various places, where VACB is housed, have been declared as police stations. Dy.SP. functions as the Station House Officer and as such exercises powers conferred by various statutes, including the Code, in the matter of registration, investigation and prosecution of cases. He is assisted in the investigation and enquiry by Police Inspectors and other subordinate police officers. Over and above, special investigation units and special cell units are also notified as police stations. A Superintendent of Police heads the unit and functions as Station House Officer of that police station.

29. Ext.P3, in both cases, is an order issued by the Home Department of the State Government on 03.06.1960. Admittedly it was issued prior to the commencement of the Police Act, 1960 which came into force on 15.02.1961. On a plain reading of Ext.P3, it will be evident that the Government had considered questions of revising the organisation, set up and working of anti-corruption machinery in the State. Government therefore formed X-Branch Police attached to CID unit under the direct supervision of Deputy Inspector General of Police, Railways and CID and Inspector General of Police. Staff strength, zones into which X-Branch were divided, nature of duties, etc. are prescribed in Ext.P3. Types of cases handled by X- Branch Police are as follows:

35. Shri D.Kishore questioned the authority of VACB to conduct investigation into corruption allegations, even if the Government had been authorised under Sections 3 and 69 of the Police Act, 1960 to constitute a police force in such manner, as may from time to time be ordered. According to him, absence of a statute empowering the police officers, who are taken on deputation to VACB, to investigate crimes under the PC Act is fatal to their authority to start, conduct and culminate an investigation into a final report and also to prosecute the alleged offenders. It is also argued that despite commencement of the Police Act, 2011 on 31.01.2011, authorising the Government to divide the police force into as many units, sub units, wings or branches on the basis of geographical convenience or functional efficiency or any special purpose, as may be decided by the Government from time to time, no order has been issued by the State in tune with Section 14 of the Police Act, 2011. They are still operating with Ext.P4, which is legally impermissible