On 9th January 2017, BSF soldier Tej Bahadur Yadav posted a video which instantly went viral and brought the corruption of BSF into the spotlight. Then came the viral video of CRPF Constable Jeet Singh. Then came the video of Indian Army Lance Naik Yagya Pratap Singh. Then the Indian Army soldier Roy Mathew was found dead after he complained about his harassment. On 19th April 2017, Tej Bahadur Yadav was removed from service.

My question is, what was the government of India's role in this case? Why did the government of India prefer to keep silence on the matter of corruption in the armed forces?

  • 2
    Same reason any higher ups don't care about corruption. They either benefit from it; or don't feel like rocking the boat with powerful constituency without a good reason to bother.
    – user4012
    May 20, 2017 at 14:53

2 Answers 2


Here's a quote from the report that may be relevant toward answering the question:

India has no designated body tasked with responsibility over ethics or anti-corruption within the MoD. There is no Inspector General position. The Public Accounts Committee, the Controller, and the Auditor General have held the MoD to account for the illegal use of land for private golf clubs.

This comes from a 2015 report from Transparency International, in which India's level of military corruption was rated "High". Pakistan, China and a number of other Asian countries faired worse, so by regional standards, the Indian military isn't necessarily exceptional, even with this recent string of scandals.

For more detailed discussion of some other structural issues that may contribute to corruption in the Indian military and some comparison, see a piece from the Brookings Institution, How Not To Deal With Defense Corruption.


Govt of India is responsible for maintaining corruption free environment in all its departments and defense forces are no exceptions. There are official channels in all govt departments which cater to complaints of corruption. For example, 'Vigilance department' is one such arrangement. The role of Govt via such departments is to ensure that no act causing loss of public money and resources and loss of interest of nation goes unpunished. For this purpose, these departments are supposed to be equipped with independent staff not reporting to any of the regular functionaries of Govt departments. So role of govt of India was to process all such complaints under these channels and produce regular information updates and investigation conclusions.

Now coming to why Govt preferred to keep silence. This seems to be a result of political pressure of both corrupt establishment as well as political leadership's interest in keeping lid on such incidents so as to push forward the claim that they have "most clean" government Indians are experiencing, this is also shown by reason that no details of any investigations were released in public domain, instead news of indiscipline proceedings against complainants was released.

You must log in to answer this question.