Short answer: An open vigilance enquiry is a fact-finding stage, not a finding of guilt. In Uttar Pradesh, Government Orders require a complaint against a Group-A officer to be supported by an affidavit and a proposed vigilance inquiry against a gazetted officer to be approved by the State Vigilance Committee; the Allahabad High Court quashed an open enquiry in 2026 where these steps were skipped. Where the allegation concerns an official decision, Section 17A approval is also needed.
The procedural safeguards in UP
In Abhishek Prakash v. State of U.P. (2026 LiveLaw (AB) 729, reported 21 September 2026), Justice Rajeev Singh of the Allahabad High Court dealt with Open Vigilance Enquiry No. 64/2025 against an IAS officer. The court noted Government Orders dated 18 May 1991, 12 September 1995, 9 May 1997 and 6 August 2018 requiring a complaint against a Group-A officer to be supported by the complainant’s affidavit, and the requirement that a proposal for a vigilance inquiry against a gazetted officer go to the State Vigilance Committee headed by the Chief Secretary.
Because the complaint lacked the affidavit and was not placed before the Committee, and the complainant admitted it was made under a wrong impression, the court set aside the orders of 20 and 28 March 2025 and the open enquiry itself.
Section 17A applies to enquiries too
Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act bars a police officer from conducting “any enquiry or inquiry or investigation” into an offence relatable to a recommendation or decision taken in official functions without prior approval. For a State Government employee, the State Government is the approving authority. The DoPT SOP of 3 September 2021 explains that an “enquiry” means verifying whether the information relates to an offence under the Act, and that separate approval is needed for each stage.
The protection does not apply to an on-the-spot arrest for accepting or attempting to accept an undue advantage, and the Supreme Court has held in Tejaram (2026) that it does not apply to a bare bribe demand.
What the officer can do
- Ask, in writing, for the scope of the enquiry and the documents sought, and keep acknowledgments of everything submitted.
- Check whether the complaint had the required affidavit and whether State Vigilance Committee approval was taken.
- Where the allegation is about a decision or recommendation, check whether Section 17A approval was obtained.
- Prepare a clear record of property returns, income and the decision file before giving any explanation.
- If the enquiry is procedurally defective, the remedy is a writ petition before the High Court.
Related questions
Is an open enquiry the same as an FIR?
No. An open enquiry is a verification stage. An FIR is registered only if the enquiry finds material disclosing a cognizable offence, after any required approval.
Must I give a statement to the vigilance officer?
An officer is generally expected to cooperate with requests for records and explanations. The content of any explanation should be prepared carefully, because it may later be relied upon.
Can an enquiry start on a complaint without an affidavit?
For Group-A officers in UP, the Government Orders discussed in Abhishek Prakash (2026) require an affidavit, and the High Court treated its absence, with the missing Committee approval, as fatal to the enquiry.
Can a disciplinary inquiry and vigilance enquiry run together?
They can, but in Abhishek Prakash the court noted that the vigilance inquiry was ordered on the same day as the complaint while disciplinary proceedings were already underway, which weighed against the order.
Practical points
- Obtain a copy of the order directing the enquiry and the complaint if available.
- Keep annual property returns and intimations under the service conduct rules up to date.
- Do not contact the complainant or witnesses about the allegations.
- Act early if the procedure appears defective; delay can weaken a writ challenge.
Sources: LiveLaw, Abhishek Prakash v. State of U.P., September 2026; India Code, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; DoPT SOP on Section 17A, 3 September 2021.
For a confidential discussion on vigilance enquiries in Uttar Pradesh, see Prevention of Corruption Act, CBI and vigilance matters.
General legal information only; not legal advice or solicitation.
