Daily
250 words
7/10
Rating

1 September 2026

SC observations on probe agencies in cases involving powerful persons

The Supreme Court's observations on the functioning and impartiality of investigative agencies directly relate to core GS2 and GS4 syllabus themes regarding judicial oversight, the separation of powers, and probity in governance.

1 min read Day 2 of 3 2 questions

Notes

  • Supreme Court observed that investigative agencies often exhibit differential treatment based on the status of the accused.
  • The Court noted a tendency for agencies to 'drag their feet' when investigating persons in authority, contrasted with swift action against ordinary citizens.
  • The judiciary highlighted the need for consistent intensity in criminal investigations, particularly in cases involving proceeds of crime.
  • The issue involves the balance between the independence of investigative agencies and the requirement for judicial oversight to ensure impartiality.
  • The Calcutta High Court previously expressed concern regarding the lack of intensity in interrogations involving high-profile individuals.

Part of a longer story

This is day 2 of 3 in Judicial oversight of investigative agencies in cases involving public figures, which has been running since 9 August 2026. Reading it whole is usually worth more than reading today alone — the exam asks how something developed.

Questions

  1. The independence and impartiality of investigative agencies are cornerstones of the rule of law. Discuss the challenges in maintaining institutional neutrality when probing cases involving influential individuals. 150 words
    Attempt this — 150 words in 8 min
    0 / 150 words 8:00
  2. Judicial oversight is essential to ensure that investigative agencies function within the constitutional framework. Analyze the role of the judiciary in preventing selective application of criminal law and ensuring equality before the law as enshrined in Article 14. 250 words
    Attempt this — 250 words in 11 min
    0 / 250 words 11:00