How to Report Corruption in India
There are more official channels for reporting corruption in India than most people realise, and they behave very differently once your complaint is inside them. This page lists each one, what it can and cannot act on, whether it will accept an anonymous complaint, and what you should expect to hear back — which, honestly, is often nothing.
The Central Vigilance Commission (CVC)
The CVC is the apex body for corruption involving central government employees, public sector banks, insurance companies and central PSUs. Complaints go through the CVC portal or by post to Satarkta Bhawan, New Delhi.
The important limitation: the CVC does not investigate. It refers. Your complaint is passed to the Chief Vigilance Officer of the organisation the accused works for, which means the department is effectively assessing itself. This is why outcomes are slow and why the same complaint filed twice can produce two different results.
- A specific, verifiable allegation — not a general grievance about a department
- The name and designation of the official, where you know it
- Documents or evidence, since an allegation with no support is usually closed at intake
- Your identity, if you want it tracked — see the PIDPI section below for the protected route
The Public Interest Disclosure and Protection of Informers resolution (PIDPI)
PIDPI is the route people mean when they say "anonymous CVC complaint", and it is widely misunderstood. A PIDPI complaint is not anonymous. It is confidential: you must give your identity to the CVC, in a sealed envelope marked "Complaint under the Public Interest Disclosure", and the CVC undertakes not to reveal it.
That distinction matters enormously. Confidentiality is a promise that a human being can break, and identities have leaked. Genuinely anonymous complaints — with no name at all — are, by the CVC's own stated policy, not acted upon. This is the central bind in Indian corruption reporting: the channels that act on your complaint require your name, and the channels that take your complaint without a name do not act.
State Anti-Corruption Bureaus and Lokayuktas
For state government officials — revenue, police, municipal, transport, PWD — the Anti-Corruption Bureau of your state is the operative body, and it does investigate. Most states run an ACB helpline, and several accept WhatsApp evidence.
The ACB is also who you approach for a trap case: if an official has demanded a bribe and you are willing to participate in a sting, the ACB can arrange one. This is genuinely effective and is how most bribery convictions in India actually happen. It is also the option that most exposes you personally.
The Lokayukta is the state-level ombudsman and sits above the ACB in most states, handling complaints against senior officials and, in some states, ministers. Its powers vary enormously by state — Karnataka's has real teeth, several others are effectively dormant.
The Right to Information Act as a corruption tool
RTI is not a complaint mechanism, but it is often the most effective single move available to an ordinary citizen. A well-drafted RTI asking for file notings, tender comparisons, muster rolls or fund utilisation certificates forces a department to put on record what it has been doing informally.
Corruption survives on the absence of a paper trail. An RTI creates one, and the answer — or the refusal to answer — becomes evidence for a later complaint. The fee is ₹10.
The 1930 helpline and cybercrime.gov.in
For financial fraud specifically — a fraudulent transaction, a digital arrest scam, a fake investment app — the 1930 helpline is the correct and urgent channel, not the ACB. The 1930 helpline received over 3.24 crore complaints in 2025 alone.
Speed is everything here: reporting a fraudulent transfer within the first hour, sometimes called the golden hour, is what makes a freeze on the receiving account possible. After 24 hours the money has usually been layered through several accounts and recovery odds collapse.
Where CrimeZero fits
Every channel above shares a structural weakness: your complaint enters a system that the accused's institution controls, and you have no independent copy of what you submitted or proof of when you submitted it. If the file goes quiet, you have nothing.
CrimeZero is built for that specific failure. A report is sealed on a blockchain the moment it lands and copied across many devices, so no single office can bury, edit or lose it — and your identity is never attached in the first place, which removes the confidentiality-versus-anonymity trap entirely. It is not a replacement for the ACB or for the police. It is the independent, permanent record that the official channels do not give you.
Frequently asked questions
Can I report corruption in India completely anonymously?
Through official channels, largely no. The CVC does not act on complaints with no name at all, and PIDPI offers confidentiality rather than anonymity — you give your identity and are trusted not to have it revealed. Genuinely anonymous reporting requires a channel that never collects your identity in the first place.
What is the difference between the ACB and the Lokayukta?
The ACB is the investigating agency for corruption by state government employees, and it runs trap cases. The Lokayukta is the state ombudsman, generally handling senior officials and, in some states, ministers. Their independence and effectiveness vary sharply from state to state.
How long does a corruption complaint take in India?
There is no statutory deadline for most complaints. CVC referrals routinely take a year or more because the accused's own department conducts the enquiry. ACB trap cases move much faster, often within days, because they are time-bound operations.
Do I need evidence to file a corruption complaint?
For a written complaint, effectively yes — allegations with no supporting material are usually closed at intake. For an ACB trap case, no prior evidence is needed, because the operation itself produces it.