Supreme Court's 'Caged Parrot' Comment Raises Questions During Kejriwal Bail Hearing
Supreme Court's 'Caged Parrot' Comment Raises Questions During kejriwal Bail Hearing
The supreme court has once again criticized the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for its perceived lack of independence, using the “caged parrot” analogy in its recent ruling on delhi Chief minister Arvind Kejriwal's bail application. This rebuke comes as the court granted bail to kejriwal on Friday, raising concerns about the timing and manner of his arrest.
The court's two-judge bench, while agreeing on the bail decision, expressed doubts about the CBI’s actions. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan specifically questioned the timing of Kejriwal's arrest, which occurred on june 25, 2024, in connection with the excise policy case. Justice Bhuyan remarked, “The cbi must not only be above board but must also be perceived as such. This court has previously described the cbi as a caged parrot. It is crucial that the cbi dispels this image and is seen as an independent agency.”
Kejriwal’s defense argued that his arrest was an "insurance move" by the cbi, aimed at preemptively addressing the possibility of his release in a separate Enforcement Directorate (ED) case. Justice Bhuyan emphadata-sized that efforts should be made to counter any perception of unfairness or bias in the investigation. He stated, “In a functional democracy, perception matters. Like Caesar’s wife, an investigating agency must be beyond reproach.”
A Familiar Critique
The supreme Court's remarks echo its 2013 criticism of the CBI. At that time, the court had described the agency as a “caged parrot” speaking in its “master’s voice” during the coal scam investigation. Justice RM lodha highlighted evidence of interference in the CBI’s probe into coalfield licenses, criticizing the agency’s lack of independence and control by the Central government.
This critique provided ammunition for opposition parties to attack the UPA government on corruption issues. Today, opposition leaders from the india bloc have accused the bjp of misusing the cbi and compromising its independence.
CBI's Defense
The cbi did not officially respond to the supreme Court’s comments but agency sources defended its actions. They claimed that the decision to arrest kejriwal was based on new evidence, including his alleged involvement in hawala transactions for AAP goa election funding. The cbi had previously questioned kejriwal in april 2023 and again in june 2024, gathering evidence from various sources before seeking his arrest.
Concerns About CBI's Independence
Following the supreme Court’s remarks, delhi minister Saurabh Bhardwaj criticized Union home minister amit shah, suggesting he should resign due to the court’s comments on central agencies under his purview. However, the delhi Police Special Establishment Act gives the Ministry of home Affairs no direct control over the CBI. The agency operates under the Central Vigilance Commission and has its own administrative structure, with a fixed two-year tenure for the Director, as selected by a panel including the Prime minister, Chief Justice of india, and leader of Opposition.
Recent changes, including a 2023 executive order allowing for extensions of the cbi Director’s term, have been criticized by the opposition as potentially compromising the agency's autonomy. The government justifies these provisions as necessary for continuity in sensitive cases
The supreme court has once again criticized the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for its perceived lack of independence, using the “caged parrot” analogy in its recent ruling on delhi Chief minister Arvind Kejriwal's bail application. This rebuke comes as the court granted bail to kejriwal on Friday, raising concerns about the timing and manner of his arrest.
The court's two-judge bench, while agreeing on the bail decision, expressed doubts about the CBI’s actions. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan specifically questioned the timing of Kejriwal's arrest, which occurred on june 25, 2024, in connection with the excise policy case. Justice Bhuyan remarked, “The cbi must not only be above board but must also be perceived as such. This court has previously described the cbi as a caged parrot. It is crucial that the cbi dispels this image and is seen as an independent agency.”
Kejriwal’s defense argued that his arrest was an "insurance move" by the cbi, aimed at preemptively addressing the possibility of his release in a separate Enforcement Directorate (ED) case. Justice Bhuyan emphadata-sized that efforts should be made to counter any perception of unfairness or bias in the investigation. He stated, “In a functional democracy, perception matters. Like Caesar’s wife, an investigating agency must be beyond reproach.”
A Familiar Critique
The supreme Court's remarks echo its 2013 criticism of the CBI. At that time, the court had described the agency as a “caged parrot” speaking in its “master’s voice” during the coal scam investigation. Justice RM lodha highlighted evidence of interference in the CBI’s probe into coalfield licenses, criticizing the agency’s lack of independence and control by the Central government.
This critique provided ammunition for opposition parties to attack the UPA government on corruption issues. Today, opposition leaders from the india bloc have accused the bjp of misusing the cbi and compromising its independence.
CBI's Defense
The cbi did not officially respond to the supreme Court’s comments but agency sources defended its actions. They claimed that the decision to arrest kejriwal was based on new evidence, including his alleged involvement in hawala transactions for AAP goa election funding. The cbi had previously questioned kejriwal in april 2023 and again in june 2024, gathering evidence from various sources before seeking his arrest.
Concerns About CBI's Independence
Following the supreme Court’s remarks, delhi minister Saurabh Bhardwaj criticized Union home minister amit shah, suggesting he should resign due to the court’s comments on central agencies under his purview. However, the delhi Police Special Establishment Act gives the Ministry of home Affairs no direct control over the CBI. The agency operates under the Central Vigilance Commission and has its own administrative structure, with a fixed two-year tenure for the Director, as selected by a panel including the Prime minister, Chief Justice of india, and leader of Opposition.
Recent changes, including a 2023 executive order allowing for extensions of the cbi Director’s term, have been criticized by the opposition as potentially compromising the agency's autonomy. The government justifies these provisions as necessary for continuity in sensitive cases