Kochi: Kerala High Court on Thursday directed the state government to explain the powers given to the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau. The court asked the state to clarify whether VACB has got exclusive powers of investigation under the Prevention of Corruption Act and if so, how and under what circumstances such power had been given. A single bench issued the directive when a petition filed by Leader of Opposition Ramesh Chennithala challenging the case registered against him in connection with the promotion and appointment of N. Shankar Reddy as director of vigilance, by the previous UDF government and also a petition by P. K. Sudheer against the registration of an FIR against him in connection with his appointment as MD of Kerala State Industrial Enterprises Limited (KSIE).
The state submitted that the authority, formation and legality of the vigilance wing were already pending before a Division Bench. The government submitted that it had established a separate vigilance division for more effective investigation of cases of corruption and misconduct on the part of the public servant by an order dated December 21, 1964. The VACB was a specialised agency of the government designed to combat and control corruption among its public servant. It undertakes the investigation of cases registered under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act and any offence under any act committed in the same transaction and conduct an inquiry into the complaints of misconduct and misdemeanour of the public servant.
As per the vigilance manual and government order issued in 1992, the procedure and working of the department were prescribed. The VACB takes up investigation or inquiry on the following types of offences/allegations; the offence punishable under the PC Act/ any dishonest or intentional improper conduct or abuse of powers, gross negligence or dereliction of duty misuse of any public money or property, the affidavit said. The functions of the VACB were based on the Vigilance Manual and the Government Orders issued from time to time apart from the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure.
