The move comes after an order of Delhi High Court which had expressed dissatisfaction over the investigations carried out by Delhi Police Crime Branch in the case.
Sharma, a property dealer, had carried out sting operation between 2008 and 2010 and secretly filmed a number of Delhi Police and MCD officials allegedly taking bribes across the national capital territory.
CBI has registered a case under provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act against unknown officers of Delhi Police and the civic body.
CBI had claimed reservations on taking up the probe saying the investigation is at the tail end by Delhi Police which was rejected by the Delhi High Court.
Sharma had carried out sting operation at 30 points in the national capital and a number of traffic police personnel were caught on camera allegedly accepting bribes from Blueline bus operators.
Besides this, he had also conducted sting operations on MCD officers and allegedly captured their audio-video recordings while taking bribe from public.
was made out under the PC Act against 21 police personnel, it had noted.
"It is disturbing to note that most of the public witnesses are not traceable, or when traceable have refused to give statements. Failure to locate or trace public witnesses is a matter of concern. Delay and holdover in the registration of the FIR for about two years and subsequent investigation could be the reason and cause," it said.
In a terse order, the High Court had said other possible causes for the failure to locate and trace witnesses could be that the names and other details provided are false, or that the investigating agency is choosing to hinder and protect.
The Court had said the investigation has struggled, has become bedraggled, and has not proceeded meticulously and punctiliously, as was required and necessary, when stated incidents of corruption and bribes were captured live on recording media.
It said the persons allegedly involved are not one or two but numerous police officers, who are meant to check crime and enforce the law.
"Apparently, the primary investigation has revealed the commission of offences by a number of officers taking bribes. It is difficult to appreciate and understand why it has taken more than six years after the order dated 28th July, 2010 to complete investigation and file the charge sheet," the HC said in its November last order.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
