On a day the CBI raided Congress leader Bhupinder Hooda and sought the custody of P. Chidambaram, Arun Jaitley referred to “investigative adventurism” and wondered “is a journey to nowhere (or everywhere) being undertaken?”

The convalescing minister without portfolio, who was finance minister till Wednesday, was not referring to the cases linked to the Congress but the ICICI Bank loan case being probed by the CBI.

Jaitley, representing a government that has been trying hard to distance itself from big business and project a pro-poor visage, swam against the political tide and asked in a Facebook post from New York: “If we include the entire who’s who of the Banking Industry — with or without evidence — what cause are we serving or actually hurting?”

Although Jaitley has not mentioned any specific agency, the case is being probed by the CBI, which falls under a ministry that reports to the Prime Minister.

Yet, Jaitley has chosen to “advise” the CBI at a time the agency is struggling to cope with a credibility crisis and charges of political meddling.

“My advice to our investigators — Follow the advice of Arjun in the Mahabharat — Just concentrate on the bulls eye,” Jaitley said in the post. CBI officials expressed shock in private.

On Thursday, the CBI had not only booked former ICICI Bank chief Chanda Kochhar and her husband but also tossed a live grenade into the world of banking by recommending investigations against several high priests of finance.

The recommendation to probe the heavyweights, including K.V. Kamath and the bosses of Goldman Sachs India and Standard Chartered India, had sent shockwaves through corporate India, especially at a time business-baiting has become a sport in the election season.

Kamath, a veteran banker, had been nominated by the Union government to head the New Development Bank (formerly BRICS Development Bank).

The head honchos were part of a committee that had cleared a loan for the Videocon group, in exchange for which Chanda’s husband was allegedly rewarded by the beneficiary in the form of investments in his company.

Jaitley cited several reasons why “investigative adventurism” should be avoided –-- which is what most of the Opposition has also been saying as its supporters are targeted. But the minister confined himself to the “potential targets” in the bank case.

Jaitley posted: “Sitting thousands of kilometers away, when I read the list of potential targets in the ICICI case, the thought that crossed my mind was again the same – Instead of focusing primarily on the target, is a journey to nowhere (or everywhere) being undertaken?”

Jaitley had begun the post by referring to “investigative adventurism”.

“There is a fundamental difference between investigative adventurism and professional investigation,” he wrote.

“Investigative adventurism involves casting the net too wide including people with no mens rea -- intention to commit a crime or knowledge of wrongdoing (addition by this newspaper) --- or even having a common intention to commit an offence, relying on presumptions and surmises with no legally admissible evidence.

“Adventurism leads to media leaks, ruins reputations and eventually invites strictures and not convictions. In the process, the targets are ruined because of harassment, loss of reputation and financial costs. It costs people their career.

“Professional investigation targets the real accused on the basis of actual and admissible evidences. It rules out fanciful presumptions. There is no personal malice or corruption. It targets the guilty and protects the innocent. It secures convictions and furthers public interest.

“One of the reasons why our conviction rates are poor is that adventurism and megalomania overtakes our investigators and professionalism takes a back seat.”

Although CBI officers declined any official comment, one of them said on the condition of anonymity: “It is shocking to say the least. The minister is now sounding like a compulsive contrarian.”

Last week, Jaitley had hit out at political rivals and slammed “compulsive contrarians” who have “no qualms about manufacturing falsehood”, citing the case of judge Loya, the Rafale deal and the CBI crisis.