Punjab withdraws general consent to CBI

The Government of Punjab formally withdrew the general consent previously granted to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), thereby restricting the agency’s powers to conduct investigations within the state without prior approval. The move signified an assertion of state authority under India’s federal framework and aligned Punjab with several other states that have taken similar steps to safeguard their jurisdictional autonomy.

Legal Framework

The CBI derives its powers from the Delhi Special Police Establishment (DSPE) Act, 1946, which mandates that the agency requires the consent of a state government to investigate offences within its territorial jurisdiction.

• General consent allows the CBI to conduct investigations against central government officials or in certain cases across the state without seeking separate permission each time.
• Specific consent requires the CBI to obtain approval from the state government for every individual case before initiating an investigation.

By withdrawing general consent, Punjab made it mandatory for the CBI to seek case-by-case permission before taking up any inquiry, search, or prosecution within the state.

Background and Decision

The Punjab government announced the withdrawal of general consent in November 2020. The decision was formalised through a state notification under Section 6 of the DSPE Act, thereby nullifying all previous orders that had permitted the CBI to operate freely within the state.
This step was taken after a review of the CBI’s functioning in various investigations and the evolving relationship between the central and state governments. Officials noted that state agencies, including the Punjab Vigilance Bureau and state police, were fully competent to handle investigations under their jurisdiction.

Implications of the Withdrawal

The revocation of general consent brought several administrative and legal implications:

• Restricted CBI Jurisdiction: The CBI can no longer automatically register or investigate cases in Punjab, except in matters concerning central government offices or undertakings located within the state.
• Case-Specific Permission: Each new case will require explicit consent from the Punjab government, ensuring greater oversight of central investigative activity.
• Pending Investigations: Ongoing cases that had received prior consent are allowed to continue; however, new investigations will not be permitted without state approval.
• Federal Balance: The move reaffirms the constitutional principle that “police” and “public order” are state subjects under the Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution.

Reasons for the Move

The Punjab government cited the need to protect its administrative autonomy and to ensure that the investigative processes within the state remain transparent and locally accountable. The decision reflected a broader pattern among several Indian states that questioned the central agency’s independence and the perceived politicisation of its investigations.
Some of the key motivations included:

• Ensuring that law enforcement within Punjab remains under the purview of the state’s own agencies.
• Preventing perceived overreach by central institutions into state-level matters.
• Strengthening state institutions like the Vigilance Bureau, Anti-Corruption Wing, and Special Task Forces to handle sensitive investigations independently.

Administrative Process

Following the decision, the Department of Home Affairs in Punjab circulated instructions to all law enforcement and administrative departments. The notification directed that:

• No state department or officer should refer a case to the CBI without obtaining prior approval from the state government.
• Any request from the CBI for cooperation or transfer of investigation must be examined by the Home Department and cleared at the highest level.
• Coordination between state and central agencies should be maintained only within the legal framework defined by the DSPE Act.

Broader Context

Punjab’s withdrawal of consent was part of a growing trend among Indian states asserting greater control over investigations within their borders. The decision highlighted an ongoing debate about the balance of power between the Union and the States in India’s federal system.
While the CBI continues to investigate cases involving central departments and entities within Punjab, the state government’s withdrawal means the agency no longer enjoys automatic jurisdiction over offences relating to state government officers or citizens.

Impact on Governance

• The measure has increased transparency and accountability in the coordination between the state and the central investigative agencies.
• It reinforced Punjab’s focus on self-governance in law enforcement, empowering local institutions to address corruption and criminal investigations independently.
• It also triggered discussions on strengthening the internal capacity of state investigation agencies to handle complex cases involving financial or cybercrime.

Constitutional and Political Significance

The action reflects the essence of cooperative federalism, where both levels of government—central and state—operate within constitutionally defined boundaries. While the CBI remains a vital central agency, its powers are subject to consent in states, preserving the sovereignty of state administrations in policing and law enforcement.
The Punjab government’s withdrawal of general consent therefore represents both a legal assertion and a political statement, underlining the autonomy of state institutions while maintaining the framework of cooperation with central authorities when deemed necessary.