Mon, Nov 09, 2026
India’s government machinery is coming under increasing vigilance scrutiny - going by the rising number of corruption complaints,
During the first eight months of 2026, the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) received 19,419 complaints, translating into an average of approximately 81 complaints a day, or one complaint every 18 minutes. The monthly figures remained consistently high, crossing the 2,500-mark in April, June, July, and August.
The CVC is responsible for promoting vigilance, preventing corruption, and ensuring transparency in the Central government administration,
The more significant aspect of the CVC data is not simply the number of complaints received, but how many eventually translate into actionable cases.
The CVC recorded 35,413 complaints in 2025. According to the figures cited in the CVC report, only 248 of these were referred for inquiry to Chief Vigilance Officers (CVO) or the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
A senior official in Gujarat’s Home Department told The Secretariat, “The CVC is focusing on expediting the disposal of pending vigilance cases.”
Another important concern is the pendency of prosecution sanctions. As many as 216 cases were reportedly pending at the prosecution sanction stage.
The trend points towards a changing administrative environment in which decision-making, public procurement, discretionary powers, and procedural compliance are increasingly being viewed through the lens of accountability.
The numbers also highlight growing pressure on the Central government’s vigilance system even as some key positions remain vacant.
While the CVC recorded over 35,000 complaints in 2025, the volume of complaints received across the wider vigilance network was almost twice that figure.
CVOs posted in various ministries, departments, public sector undertakings, banks, and other Central government organisations received 70,584 complaints during the year.
This indicates that vigilance scrutiny is no longer confined to complaints directly reaching the CVC. The wider institutional process now involves departmental vigilance mechanisms, preliminary inquiries, disciplinary proceedings and, where warranted, prosecution.
This vigilance architecture makes the complaint the starting point of a potentially long accountability chain involving scrutiny by departmental vigilance authorities, inquiries, prosecution sanctions, and disciplinary action.
The sustained increase in complaint volumes over the past five years, coupled with the high monthly numbers recorded in 2026, highlights the growing pressure on the country's Central government vigilance system.
The figures show that complaints received directly by the CVC increased by approximately 34.1% between 2021 and 2025. Over these five years, the Commission received 1,44,178 complaints, while the wider CVO network recorded 4,28,050 complaints.
Jitendra Singh, the Union Minister of State (Independent Charge) for Science and Technology and Minister of State in the PMO, Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, stated in August 2026 that the pendency of disciplinary cases before the CVC had declined from around 4,000 to nearly 700.
The reduction was attributed to administrative reforms and improved coordination between ministries and vigilance authorities.
Former Central Vigilance Commissioner Praveen Kumar Srivastava had also outlined a roadmap for strengthening the vigilance framework through wider use of the Probity Portal, simplification of vigilance procedures through Time and Motion Studies, and the use of artificial intelligence and other emerging technologies to strengthen Predictive Vigilance.
The shift towards Predictive Vigilance is significant.
Rather than relying exclusively on complaints after an alleged irregularity has occurred, technology-driven systems could help identify patterns, vulnerabilities, and potential risks in administrative and financial processes.
The Central Vigilance Commission has a provision for one Central Vigilance Commissioner and two Vigilance Commissioners.
Following the retirement of Central Vigilance Commissioner Praveen Kumar Srivastava in August 2026, Vigilance Commissioner A.S. Rajiv was appointed as Acting Central Vigilance Commissioner. Praveen Vashista is also serving as a Vigilance Commissioner.
However, one Vigilance Commissioner position and the post of Secretary remain vacant, according to sources.
The disciplinary authorities have imposed penalties in thousands of cases.
“Particular emphasis is being placed on clearing long-pending complaints, preliminary inquiries, and departmental vigilance proceedings that have been awaiting decisions for an extended period,” the Gujarat Home Department official said.
According to the official, vigilance-related complaints received by government departments have to go through several stages, including preliminary scrutiny, assessment of facts, seeking explanations from the officials concerned, preparation of inquiry reports, and subsequent necessary action.
In many cases, administrative procedures, the availability of documents and delays at different stages of investigation result in cases remaining pending for extended periods.
Against this backdrop, the CVC’s focus on expediting the disposal of pending cases assumes considerable significance.
Some states have dedicated Vigilance Commissions, while others rely primarily on Vigilance Directorates, Anti-Corruption Bureaus or Lokayukta institutions.
According to the state-wise classification cited in the available information, 10 states have Vigilance Commissions: Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Meghalaya, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Manipur, and Kerala.
States such as Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Punjab, Haryana, Odisha, Uttar Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, and Jammu and Kashmir primarily rely on their respective Vigilance Directorates or Anti-Corruption Bureaus rather than a separate Vigilance Commission.
In states such as Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, and Uttarakhand, vigilance investigations and related powers are largely centred around the Lokayukta institution.