VIJAYAWADA: The functioning of the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) has come under scrutiny, with convictions recorded in only a small percentage of the total cases registered over 12 years.
The ACB has registered 1,608 cases between June 1, 2014 and August 31, 2026, but secured convictions in only 317 cases (19.7%), raising questions about the effectiveness of anti-corruption enforcement.
According to information obtained under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, as many as 314 cases ended in acquittals, while another 154 were disposed of for various reasons, including action dropped, death of the accused officers, and discharge from the cases.
The figures offer a snapshot of challenges faced by agency tasked with preventing graft and bringing public servants accused of graft to justice.
The real test lies in securing convictions in corruption cases through investigation, gathering credible evidence, and effective prosecution, while ensuring that public money and assets acquired through corrupt practices are recovered wherever legally justified.
ACB data show a 19.7% conviction rate among 1,608 cases registered over 12 years. While 314 cases ended in acquittals and 154 were disposed of, 823 cases, accounting for 51.2% of the total, remain pending investigation, or trials.
The figures raise a question of how effectively the anti-graft machinery is converting registered cases into legally sustainable convictions. For citizens who encounter demands for bribes or delays in accessing government services, the credibility of the ACB depends not merely on the number of cases registered or traps laid, but also on whether investigations result in convictions and accountability. A high volume of case registration, without outcome, may weaken public confidence in the system.
“Public perception is more important. When corruption cases in huge numbers end in acquittals, citizens may begin to question whether action against corrupt officials can lead to meaningful consequences.
A perception that accused officials can escape punishment weakens public confidence in the anti-corruption machinery, and risks undermining the deterrent effect of vigilance and enforcement measures,” opined a senior police official on the condition of anonymity.
“Courts may acquit accused persons because the prosecution fails to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, witnesses turn hostile, evidence is insufficient or procedural and legal requirements are not met. The ACB and the prosecution machinery need to identify recurring weaknesses, and establish accountability wherever lapses are demonstrated,” said ACB Director General Atul Singh.
“ACB’s effective enforcement in all these years has discouraged officials from demanding bribes, and improved the delivery of government services,” he said.