The recent exoneration of ICICI Bank and NDTV promoters in a 2017 case by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) should be cause for relief, but it casts a harsh spotlight on a disturbing pattern: the strategic use of state apparatus to target dissenting voices. After nearly seven years of probing and a forensic audit, the CBI concluded there was no collusion, no abuse of position, and no merit to the allegations. This raises the profound question as to why were these individuals targeted in the first place?
The NDTV case is emblematic of an increasingly prevalent practice in India’s political and economic landscape - the use of investigative agencies as instruments of pressure. In this instance, the scrutiny of the promoters, Prannoy and Radhika Roy, seemed to align with a pattern witnessed in the past decade: journalists, media houses, and corporations that exhibit independence or defiance of government orthodoxy find themselves subject to investigations that, more often than not, culminate in a whimper rather than a bang.
The invocation of agencies like the CBI, the Enforcement Directorate (ED), and the Income Tax Department has become a familiar lever in the apparatus of power. These bodies, mandated to ensure accountability and uphold the rule of law, risk eroding their legitimacy when perceived as cudgels wielded for political ends. This undermines both democratic norms and investor confidence—cornerstones essential for any economy aspiring to global influence.
The NDTV case is emblematic of an increasingly prevalent practice in India’s political and economic landscape—the use of investigative agencies as instruments of pressure. In this instance, the scrutiny of the promoters, Prannoy and Radhika Roy, seemed to align with a pattern witnessed in the past decade: journalists, media houses, and corporations that exhibit independence or defiance of government orthodoxy find themselves subject to investigations that, more often than not, culminate in a whimper rather than a bang.
The case against the Roys and NDTV served as an illustrative test of media independence. Critics argue that it was no coincidence the network’s editorial line had, at times, run counter to prevailing government narratives.
The routine deployment of financial and regulatory probes not only intimidates but also diverts attention from real policy challenges. The energy spent on legal theatrics drains both the targets and the agencies themselves, diverting resources from addressing substantive issues such as financial frauds that genuinely merit investigation. Besides, if the objective central government was to exert pressure, then it has had the boomerang effect of casting the Roys as inadvertent martyrs in the battle for journalistic freedom. Reforming the framework within which agencies operate is essential to arresting this trend. Structural and procedural independence, coupled with robust oversight mechanisms, could insulate investigative bodies from political tugs-of-war. Until then, the exoneration of ICICI Bank and NDTV’s promoters will serve as a bittersweet reminder that innocence is no bulwark against being drawn into the machinery of power politics.
Comments