By ARFAT KHAN
Recent surge in anti-graft activity by the Jammu and Kashmir Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) has revived public expectations that the long-running battle against graft in the Union Territory may finally be shifting from rhetoric to results. The appointment of Mr. Shakti Pathak as Director has coincided with a noticeable increase in raids, trap cases and preliminary verifications, signaling a more assertive institutional posture against entrenched corruption. Corruption in Jammu and Kashmir, as elsewhere, has traditionally flourished in departments characterized by high public interface and wide discretionary powers. Revenue, Rural Development, Police, Public Works (R&B), Power Development, Jal Shakti and Urban Local Bodies remain widely perceived as the most corruption-prone.
The ACB’s renewed focus on these sectors has sent an important message: routine bribery and institutionalized rent-seeking will no longer be treated as administrative inevitabilities. The Bureau’s intensified action in land administration is particularly significant. A steady stream of cases involving patwaris, girdawars and tehsildars, along with investigations into land-related scams, reflects both the depth of the problem and the willingness to act at the level where citizens most directly encounter the state. Given the centrality of land to livelihoods, property rights and social stability, this focus carries substantial public interest value.
Beyond Revenue, ACB interventions have extended to the Police, Jal Shakti, Power Development, Rural Development and Housing and Urban Development departments, where allegations of bribery, procurement irregularities and abuse of office have long persisted. These cases underscore an uncomfortable reality: corruption in J&K is not sector-specific but systemic. Encouragingly, the Bureau has also attempted to move beyond a purely punitive framework by issuing advisories to departments, promoting preventive vigilance and expanding public outreach to encourage complaint reporting. Capacity-building efforts for investigators indicate a recognition of the growing complexity of financial and property-related offences.
However, this renewed offensive is far from a decisive institutional breakthrough. Chronic manpower shortages continue to constrain investigations, with a small cadre of officers handling an overwhelming caseload. Limited forensic capacity, technical expertise and legal support weaken prosecutions and slow trials. More troubling is the persistent perception that enforcement remains concentrated on lower- and middle-level officials, while senior functionaries—often the nodal points of corrupt networks—remain largely beyond reach. Low conviction rates and prolonged judicial delays further dilute deterrence, allowing accused officials to outlast proceedings through retirement or procedural attrition.
For the ACB’s campaign to evolve into credible reform, sustained political and administrative backing is indispensable. Strengthening the Bureau with adequate manpower, modern investigative tools and insulation from interference is not optional but essential. Ultimately, the success of Jammu and Kashmir’s anti-corruption drive will not be measured by the frequency of raids or press releases, but by convictions secured, illicit assets recovered and accountability enforced at the highest levels. Symbolic action may momentarily reassure the public; structural reform alone can restore trust. The choice before the system is stark: institutionalize integrity—or allow corruption to once again outlast the crackdown.