Maharashtra Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) has revealed that at least 205 government officials across the state, who have been booked in corruption-related cases, are yet to be suspended by their respective departments.
According to the ACB statistics available up to November 2025, these pending cases span 19 government departments. Among the officials who have not faced suspension, 36 belong to Class I, 37 to Class II, 120 to Class III, and 12 to Class IV services. Notably, the Maharashtra Police is among the top three departments with officials facing corruption charges but remaining in service.
City-wise data:
The data shows that the highest number of such cases are from the Mumbai range. A total of 47 officials in Mumbai have not been suspended despite being booked in corruption cases, followed by Thane with 43 cases.
Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar - 29,
Pune - 23
Nashik - 22
Amravati - 16
Nagpur - 14
Nanded - 11
Some of these cases date back as far as 2014.
Department-wise analysis:
Education and Sports Department accounts for the highest number of officials not placed under suspension, with 48 cases.
This is followed by 36 officials from municipal corporations and urban development departments.
The Revenue, Registration, and Land Records Department, as well as the Police, Jails, and Home Guards Department, each account for 26 such officials.
The Rural Development Department has 16 officials in the same category.
Also Read: Mumbai Registers Least Number Of Corruption-Related Trap Cases With 39 in 2025
In addition, the ACB data reveals that 20 government officials booked in corruption cases are yet to be terminated from service. By December 2025, the ACB had registered a total of 682 corruption-related cases across Maharashtra, including 669 trap cases and nine cases involving disproportionate assets.
Senior police officials stated that public servants who have been convicted in corruption cases should be issued notices and removed from service without delay. They also noted that the Chief Secretary is expected to hold monthly review meetings with departmental heads to seek explanations for delays in initiating suspension or termination proceedings.