CorruptionAndCentral Vigilance Commission

Made by:David Cyril BabuB.A. LLB (Honours)VIIIth SemesterRoll No. 18.

Index1. Research Methodology32. Acknowledgement43. Chapter 154. Chapter 265. Chapter 386. Chapter 4107. Chapter 5128. Chapter 6 169. Chapter 7 2010. Chapter 8 2111. Chapter 9 2512. Chapter 10 2713. Chapter 11 2914. Chapter 12 3615. Chapter 134216. Chapter 144817. Conclusion7818. Vineet Narains Case8519. P.J. Thomas Case8720. Questionnaire 8921. Result 9122. Annexure 9823. Bibliography 15824.

Research Methodology

This project has been written after careful reading and examination of books, articles, blogs and expert opinion on the subject, Corruption as well as CVC, CBI, etc. The opinion of experts in this field has also been quoted as and when it was found necessary. I have also included the questionnaire used to gather the opinions and awareness of different people as well as the result in the form of pie-charts to help understand the concept of corruption and stop it in a better and more efficient manner.

AcknowledgementI would like to thank Dr. Ghulam Yazdani, our Seminar professor, for providing the help and guidance required during the entire stage of the project. He helped form the research methodology till the end of this project. He inspired us every step of the way and I am very grateful for the help and support he showed us for it would not have been possible to complete this project without it.

Chapter 1IntroductionSocio-Economic Offences

All luxury corrupts either the morals or the state. - JoubertThe new millennium era has provided a fertile platform for the very inception of an independent field of study. Socio-economics has emerged as a separate field of study in the late twentieth century. If one looks into the enigma of socio- economic offences, the root cause lies in the lust for money. These crimes are always committed by educated, highly qualified and socially reputed people. The prominent hallmark in socio-economic crimes is that these offenders pretend this illegitimately earned money is legitimate money. In the lap of globalization and advancement a new paradox has come in sight.The Free Online Dictionary defines socio-economics as, of, relating to, or involving both economic and social factors. Therefore, socio-economic offences can be defined as offences affecting both social and the economic sphere of a society. Corruption, white-collar crimes, hoarding, profiteering, black marketing, etc are some of the offences prevalent in India which come under the ambit of socio-economic offences.The main focus, with respect to this project, is on corruption, the various aspects, a comparative study and the agencies in India which are empowered to deal with corruption, with special focus on the Central Vigilance Commission.

Chapter 2Corruption

Corruption is worse than prostitution. The latter might endanger the morals of an individual; the former invariably endangers the morals of the entire country. - Karl KrausMerriam-Websters defines corruption as:A: impairment of integrity, virtue, or moral principle: Depravity.B: decay, decomposition.C: inducement to wrong by improper or unlawful means (as bribery)D: a departure from the original or from what is pure or correct.Corruption, in one form or the other, with respect to the Indian society, has prevailed from time immemorial. In modern times, people who work on right principles are unrecognized and considered to be foolish. Corruption in India is a result of the nexus between bureaucrats, politicians and criminals.The following is an example as to how corruption has succeeded in changing our society, for the worse:It is a well known fact that when the Verification Officer comes over to verify ones passport, one has to grease his palm so that the procedure is completed without a hitch.Earlier, bribes were paid for getting wrong things done, but now a bribe is paid for getting right things done at right time. Moreover, corruption in India has received some sort of sanction as respectable people are involved in it. In todays scenario, even though a person might be otherwise competent with respect to the requirements of a government job, however, he ends up paying lakhs of rupees to the higher officials to get that post. In every office, one has to either give money to the employee concerned or arrange for some sources to get the work done. There is adulteration and duplicate weighing of products in the food and civil supplies department by unscrupulous workers who cheat the consumers and also play with the health and lives of the people. In the assessment of property tax the officers charge money even if the house is built properly according to the Government rules and regulations. These are some of the many instances that are prevalent in the India that we know of.If looked at from a moral, theological or a philosophical view, corruption is any spiritual or moral deviation from an ideal. From the economic viewpoint, corruption is payment for services or material which, under law, the recipient is not due. This may be called bribery, kickback, or baksheesh, as known in the Middle East. From the political viewpoint, corruption happens when an elected representative makes decisions that are influenced by campaign contributions, rather than their own personal beliefs.

Chapter 3Types of Corruption

[footnoteRef:1] [1: Voglewede and Associates.]

The picture is an example of the many forms of corruption prevalent in the society or the workplaces.Some general kinds of corruption which are common in the many countries are as follows:

1. Political Corruption.2. Administrative Corruption.3. Legal and Moral Corruption.

Chapter 4Political Corruption

Political corruption is the use of power by government officials for illegitimate private gain. Misuse of government power for other purposes, such as repression of political opponents and general police brutality, is not considered political corruption. Neither are illegal acts by private persons or corporations not directly involved with the government. An illegal act by an officeholder constitutes political corruption only if the act is directly related to their official duties, is done under colour of law or involves trading in influence.Forms of corruption vary, but include bribery, extortion, cronyism, nepotism, patronage, graft, and embezzlement. Corruption may facilitate criminal enterprise such as drug trafficking, money laundering, and human trafficking, though is not restricted to these activities.The activities that constitute illegal corruption differ depending on the country or jurisdiction. For instance, some political funding practices that are legal in one place may be illegal in another. In some cases, government officials have broad or ill-defined powers, which make it difficult to distinguish between legal and illegal actions. Worldwide, bribery alone is estimated to involve over 1 trillion US dollars annually. A state of unrestrained political corruption is known as a kleptocracy, literally meaning "rule by thieves".[footnoteRef:2]Chapter 5 [2: World map of the 2010 Corruption Perceptions Index by Transparency International which measures "the degree to which corruption is perceived to exist among public officials and politicians". High numbers (blue) indicate less perception of corruption, whereas lower numbers (red) an indicate higher perception of corruption.]

Effects of Political Corruption Effect on politics, administration, and institutionsCorruption poses a serious threat or challenge to development. In the political realm, it undermines democracy and good governance by flouting formal processes. Corruption in elections and in legislative bodies reduces accountability and distorts representation in policy making; corruption in the judiciary compromises the rule of law; and corruption in public administration results in the inefficient provision of services. Corruption erodes the institutional capacity of government as procedures are disregarded, resources are siphoned off, and public offices are bought and sold. At the same time, corruption undermines the legitimacy of government and democratic values such as trust and tolerance. Economic effectsIn the private sector, corruption increases the cost of business through the price of illicit payments themselves, the management cost of negotiating with officials, and the risk of breached agreements or detection. Although some claim corruption reduces costs by cutting bureaucracy, the availability of bribes can also induce officials to contrive new rules and delays. Openly removing costly and lengthy regulations are better than covertly allowing them to be bypassed by using bribes. Where corruption inflates the cost of business, it also distorts the playing field, shielding firms with connections from competition and thereby sustaining inefficient firms.Corruption also generates economic distortions in the public sector by diverting public investment into capital projects where bribes and kickbacks are more plentiful. Officials may increase the technical complexity of public sector projects to conceal or pave the way for such dealings, thus further distorting investment. Corruption also lowers compliance with construction, environmental, or other regulations, reduces the quality of government services and infrastructure, and increases budgetary pressures on government. Environmental and social effectsCorruption facilitates environmental destruction. Corrupt countries may formally have legislation to protect the environment; it cannot be enforced if officials can easily be bribed. The same applies to social rights worker protection, unionization prevention, and child labour. Violation of these laws rights enables corrupt countries to gain illegitimate economic advantage in the international market.The Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen has observed that "there is no such thing as an apolitical food problem." While drought and other naturally occurring events may trigger famine conditions, it is government action or inaction that determines its severity, and often even whether or not a famine will occur. Governments with strong tendencies towards kleptocracy can undermine food security even when harvests are good. Officials often steal state property. In Bihar, more than 80% of the subsidized food aid to poor is stolen by corrupt officials. Similarly, food aid is often robbed at gunpoint by governments, criminals, and warlords alike, and sold for a profit.

Effects on Humanitarian AidThe scale of humanitarian aid to the poor and unstable regions of the world grows, but it is highly vulnerable to corruption, with food aid, construction and other highly valued assistance as the most at risk. Food aid can be directly and physically diverted from its intended destination, or indirectly through the manipulation of assessments, targeting, registration and distributions to favour certain groups or individuals. Elsewhere, in construction and shelter, there are numerous opportunities for diversion and profit through substandard workmanship, kickbacks for contracts and favouritism in the provision of valuable shelter material. Thus while humanitarian aid agencies are usually most concerned about aid being diverted by including too many; recipients themselves are most concerned about exclusion. Access to aid may be limited to those with connections, to those who pay bribes or are forced to give sexual favours. Equally, those able to do so may manipulate statistics to inflate the number beneficiaries and siphon of the additional assistance. Other areas: health, public safety, education, trade unions, etc.Corruption is not specific to poor, developing, or transition countries. In western countries, cases of bribery and other forms of corruption in all possible fields exist: under-the-table payments made to reputed surgeons by patients attempting to be on top of the list of forthcoming surgeries, bribes paid by suppliers to the automotive industry in order to sell low-quality connectors used for instance in safety equipment such as airbags, bribes paid by suppliers to manufacturers of defibrillators (to sell low-quality capacitors), contributions paid by wealthy parents to the "social and culture fund" of a prestigious university in exchange for it to accept their children, bribes paid to obtain diplomas, financial and other advantages granted to unionists by members of the executive board of a car manufacturer in exchange for employer-friendly positions and votes, etc. These various manifestations of corruption can ultimately present a danger for the public health; they can discredit specific, essential institutions or social relationships.Corruption can also affect the various components of sports activities (referees, players, medical and laboratory staff involved in anti-doping controls, members of national sport federation and international committees deciding about the allocation of contracts and competition places).

Affected Agencies/Institutions[footnoteRef:3] [3: 3 Voglewede and Associates.]

Chapter 6Conditions Favourable for Corruption

It is argued that the following conditions are favourable for corruption:Information deficits: Lacking freedom of information legislation. For example, the Indian Right to Information Act 2005 is perceived to have "already engendered mass movements in the country that is bringing the lethargic, often corrupt bureaucracy to its knees and changing power equations completely." Lack of investigative reporting in the local media. Contempt for or negligence of exercising freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Weak accounting practices, including lack of timely financial management. Lack of measurement of corruption. For example, using regular surveys of households and businesses in order to quantify the degree of perception of corruption in different parts of a nation or in different government institutions may increase awareness of corruption and create pressure to combat it. This will also enable an evaluation of the officials who are fighting corruption and the methods used. Tax havens which tax their own citizens and companies but not those from other nations and refuse to disclose information necessary for foreign taxation. This enables large scale political corruption in the foreign nations. Lacking control of the government: Lacking civic society and non-governmental organisations which monitor the government. An individual voter may have a rational ignorance regarding politics, especially in nationwide elections, since each vote has little weight. Weak civil service and slow pace of reform. Weak rule of law. Weak legal profession. Weak judicial independence. Lacking protection of whistleblowers. Government Accountability Project Lack of benchmarking; i.e., continual detailed evaluation of procedures and comparison to others who do similar things, in the same government or others, in particular comparison to those who do the best work. For example, the Peruvian organisation Ciudadanos al Dia has started to measure and compare transparency, costs, and efficiency in different government departments in Peru. It annually awards the best practices that have received widespread media attention. This has created competition among government agencies in order to improve. Opportunities and incentives: Individual officials routinely handle cash, instead of handling payments on a separate cash deskillegitimate withdrawals from supervised bank accounts are much more difficult to conceal. Public funds are centralized rather than distributed. Large, unsupervised public investments. Sale of state-owned property and privatization. Poorly-paid government officials. Government licenses needed to conduct business, e.g., import licenses, and encourage bribing and kickbacks. Long-time work in the same position may create relationships inside and outside the government which encourage and help conceal corruption and favouritism. Rotating government officials to different positions and geographic areas may help prevent this; for instance certain high rank officials in French government services (e.g., treasurer-paymasters general) must rotate every few years. Costly political campaigns, with expenses exceeding normal sources of political funding, especially when funded with taxpayer money. Less interaction with officials reduces the opportunities for corruption. For example, using the Internet for sending in required information, like applications and tax forms, and then processing this with automated computer systems. This may also speed up the processing and reduce unintentional human errors. A windfall from exporting abundant natural resources may encourage corruption. War and other forms of conflict correlate with a breakdown of public security.

Social conditions: Family-, and clan-centred social structure, with a tradition of nepotism or favouritism being acceptable. Lacking literacy and education among the population. Frequent discrimination and bullying among the population. Tribal solidarity, giving benefits to certain ethnic groupsIn the Indian political system, for example, it has become usual that the leadership of national and regional parties are passed from generation to generation, creating a system in which a family holds the centre of power. Some examples are the Dravidian parties of south India and also the Congress party, which is one of the two major political parties in India.

Chapter 7Administrative Corruption

The really basic thing in government is policy. Bad administration, to be sure, can destroy good policy, but good administration can never save bad policy. Adlai E Stevenson Jr.

Administrative corruption occurs when a person indulges in corrupt practices like bribery to get a work done. It includes persons like higher authorities, officers, police officers, clerks, peons, etc. For example, if one gives money one can get anything difficult done very easily.With respect to a drivers license, if one gives money to the officer, theres no need to visit the office, theres no need to give the test. One will get driving license without breaking a sweat. Money makes the world go round is the magic phrase on everyones lips nowadays. With respect to passports, it is a well known fact that if one does not grease the palms of the verification officer, he will not give a satisfactory view or the application might get lost in the process. It is common knowledge that wherever one goes (be it hospitals, courts or other government institutions) one will have to shell out some money for any work to take place without any hindrance.Administrative corruption, the estimated losses, the agencies/ areas affected and the efforts to curb such corruption have been dealt with in the next two chapters.

Chapter 8The Affected AgenciesBureaucracyA 2005 study done by Transparency International (TI) in India found that more than 50% of the people had firsthand experience of paying bribe or peddling influence to get a job done in a public office. Taxes and bribes are common between state borders; Transparency International estimates that truckers pay annually US $5 billion in bribes. A 2009 survey of the leading economies of Asia, revealed Indian bureaucracy to be not just least efficient, out of Singapore, Hong Kong, Thailand, South Korea, Japan, Malaysia, Taiwan, Vietnam, China, Philippines, and Indonesia; but also found that working with India's civil servants was a "slow and painful" process. Land and propertyOfficials often steal state property. In cities and villages throughout India, consisting of municipal and other government officials, elected politicians, judicial officers, real estate developers and law enforcement officials, acquire, develop and sell land in illegal ways.Tendering processes and awarding contractsGovernment officials having discretionary powers in awarding contracts engage in preferential treatment for selected bidders and display negligence in quality control processes. Many state-funded construction activities in India, such as road building, are dominated by construction mafias, which are groupings of corrupt public works officials, materials suppliers, politicians and construction contractors.

Shoddy construction and material substitution (e.g., mixing sand in cement while submitting expenses for cement) result in roads and highways being dangerous, and sometimes simply washed away when India's heavy monsoon season arrives. MedicineIn government hospitals, corruption is associated with non-availability or duplication of medicines, getting admission, consultations with doctors and availing diagnostic services. One more common feature in the government hospitals is the perpetual non-availability of beds for Out Patients or more commonly known as Normal People.Income tax departmentThere have been several cases of collusion of officials of the income tax department of India for a favourable tax treatment and relaxed prosecutions in return for bribes.Preferential award of public resourcesAs detailed earlier, land in areas with short supply is relatively common, with government entities awarding public land to private concerns at negligible rates. Other examples include the award of mining leases to private companies without a levy of taxes that is proportionate to the market value of the ore.Driver LicensingA study[footnoteRef:4] conducted between 2004 and 2005 found that Indias driver licensing procedure was a hugely distorted bureaucratic process and allows drivers to get licenses despite their low driving ability through promoting the usage of agents. [4: Bertrand, Marianne et. al. Obtaining a Drivers License in India: An Experimental Approach to Studying Corruption, The Quarterly Journal of Economics (Nov 2007, No. 122,4)]

Individuals with high willingness to pay make a significant payment above the official fee and most of these extra payments are made to agents, who act as an intermediary between bureaucrats and applicants.The average license getter paid Rs 1080, approximately 2.5 times the official fee of Rs 450, in order to obtain a license. On average, those who hired agents had a lower driving ability, with agents helping unqualified drivers obtain licenses and bypass the legally required driving examination. Among the surveyed individuals, approximately 60% of the license holders did not take the licensing exam and 54% of those license holders failed an independent driving test.[footnoteRef:5] [5: Corruption in Driver licensing Process in Delhi. http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/mullainathan/files/Corruption.in.Driving.Licensing.Process.in.Delhi.pdf.]

Agents are the channels of inefficient corruption in this bureaucratic driver licensing system, facilitating access to licenses among those who are unqualified to drive. Some of the failures of this licensing system are caused by corrupt bureaucrats who collaborate with agents by creating additional barriers within the system against those who did not hire agents.Black moneyBlack money refers to money removed from the official economy (via corruption, bribery, tax evasion, etc.) and stored outside of the country. A November 2010 report from the Washington-based Global Financial Integrity estimates that India lost at least US$462 billion in illicit financial flows, another word for black money, from 1948 through 2008. The report also estimated the size of India's underground economy at approximately US$640 billion at the end of 2008 or roughly 50% of the nation's GDP.[footnoteRef:6] [6: Kar, Dev (2010). The Drivers and Dynamics of Illicit Financial Flows from India: 1948-2008. Washington, DC: Global Financial Integrity. http://india.gfintegrity.org/.]

Black Money in SwitzerlandAccording to a 2010 The Hindu article, unofficial estimates indicate that Indians had over US$1456 billion in black money stored in Swiss banks (approximately USD1.4 trillion). While some news reports claimed that data provided by the Swiss Banking Association Report (2006) showed India has more black money than the rest of the world combined, a more recent report quoted the SBA's Head of International Communications as saying that no such official statistics exist. Another report said that Indian-owned Swiss bank account assets are worth 13 times the countrys national debt. The current investigation is undertaken by the Income Tax Department.JudiciaryAccording to Transparency International, judicial corruption in India is attributable to factors such as "delays in the disposal of cases, shortage of judges and complex procedures, all of which are exacerbated by a preponderance of new laws".Armed forcesThe Indian Armed Forces have witnessed corruption involving senior armed forces officers from the Indian Army, Indian Navy and Indian Air Force. A number of scandals in the 2000-2010 period damaged the military's reputation; such scandals included skimming of armed forces money, reselling of government property, and faking combat missions. Another example is the recent case brought to light where an ex-military personnel (now working as a lobbyist) tried to bribe the Army Chief V.K. Singh (offering Rs. 14 crores) to accept delivery of substandard trucks for the army.

Chapter 9Combating Corruption

Right to Information ActThe Right to Information Act (2005) and equivalent acts in the states require government officials to furnish information requested by citizens or face punitive action, computerization of services and various central and state government acts that established vigilance commissions have considerably reduced corruption or at least have opened up avenues to redress grievances. The 2006 report by Transparency International puts India at the 70th place and states that significant improvements were made by India in reducing corruption. OmbudsmenThe Lokayukta is an anti-corruption organisation in the Indian states. These institutions are based on the Ombudsman in Scandinavian countries. An amendment to the Constitution has been proposed to implement the Lokayukta uniformly across Indian States as a three-member body, headed by a retired Supreme Court judge or High Court Chief Justice, and comprise of the state vigilance commissioner and a jurist or an eminent administrator as other members. Social welfare worker Anna Hazare leads the movement to compel the Indian Government to notify the Committee for the implementation of the Lokayukta against corruption as an independent body and also giving enough powers to the Lokayukta to also receive corruption complaints against politicians, bureaucrats and even sitting judges. Anna Hazare is pursuing his agenda to pass the Jan Lokpal bill or the Peoples Bill, and has gathered the support of many citizens residing in metropolitan cities of India. He was also on an indefinite fast at the Ramlila Grounds, Delhi, in order to campaign for the cause. WhistleblowersWhistleblowers play a major role in the fight against corruption. India currently does not have a law to protect whistleblowers, which was highlighted by the assassination of Satyendra Dubey. Indian courts are regularly ordering probe in cases of murders or so-called suicide of several whistleblowers. One of the latest cases of such murder is of V. Sasindran, Company Secretary of Palakkad based Malabar Cement Limited, a Government company in Kerala and his two minor children.Kerala High Court ordered CBI probe on 18 February 2011. Initially, CBI showed its unwillingness for probing into such cases citing over-burden as a reason.

Chapter 10Legal and Moral Corruption

Corruption is derived from the Latin verb rumpere, meaning: to break. According to this approach, corruption is where the law is clearly broken. This requires that all laws must be precisely stated, leaving no doubts about their meaning and no discretion to the public officials.A legal interpretation of corruption provides a clearly demarcated boundary between what is a corrupt activity and what is not. If an officials act is prohibited by laws established by the government, it is corrupt; if it is not prohibited, it is not corrupt even if it is abusive or unethical. (John A. Gardiner, 1993. Defining Corruption In: Corruption and Reform 7)The legal approach provides a neutral and static method of adjudicating potentially emotive and perception determined concepts of corruption. An understanding of corruption from law perspective serves to underline a deterioration of self-regulated behaviour and a dependence on the legal approach to determine right from wrong. The complexities of modern governance and a proliferation of corruption scandals have corresponded with a proliferation of complex corruption legislation. Morality is increasingly being legislated for in the absence and loss of faith in self- regulated behaviour. Although an act is committed within legal parameters it may lie outside moral boundaries. A corrupt act can be camouflaged by lawful justification. For example, undue emphasis on narrow legalism has obscured more subtle yet costly manifestations of misgovernance, where legal corruption may be more prevalent than illegal forms.[footnoteRef:7] [7: (D. Kaufmann, September 2006, Corruption, Governance and Security. In: World Economic Forum. Global Competitiveness Report 2004/2005.)]

From this perspective corruption encompasses undue influence over public policies, institutions, laws and regulations by vested private interests at the expense of the public interest. Cultural change, rather than legal change, may be necessary to impede corrupt behaviour. Non-corrupt actions may be within the letter of the law but do not account for the spirit of the law. The legal approach diminishes the role of moral discretion and is constrained by clearly defined edicts.[footnoteRef:8] [8: Elaine Byrne, 2007. The Moral and Legal Development of Corruption: Nineteeth and Twentieth Century Corruption in Ireland. PhD Thesis, University of Limerick.]

Chapter 11History of Corruption in India

The chapter deals with the history of corruption in India, starting from the ancient period moving on to the British period and then moving on to the post-independent period. Accordingly, the chapter has been divided into different sections dealing with the various periods which are as follows:

The Ancient Period

Corruption in India has been a problem ever since the country had a multilayered administration composed of officers, ministers and other administrative chiefs. The corruption problem in ancient India, coupled with bribery, kept infesting the society more and more at an increasing rate. This is quite clear from the way the writers like Ksemendra and Kalhana had condemned the government officials, as well as other employees at different levels, in their celebrated works. Ksemendra in his Dasavataracaritam has advised the king to remove all the officials, ministers, generals and priests from their respective offices with immediate effect, who were either taking bribes themselves or had been indulging in corruption in some other way. Ksemendra also found an answer to the much discussed question as to how corruption should be stopped. He explicitly addressed the contemporary intelligentsia to step forward and shoulder the responsibility of purging their folks.

Kalhana too was merciless in his condemnation of the corrupt government officers. He damned the officials outright and asked the king to stay alert. Kalhana has also cited some example:He said that Bijja became even richer than the king as he resorted to unfair means of getting money, while Ananda managed to achieve a high post in the office by bribing his higher officials. Embezzlements and Black Money in Ancient IndiaEmbezzlement in India was also prevalent in the ancient period, mostly among the police and administrative officers. In fact, Kautilya has given a detailed list, referring to not less than forty ways of embezzlement that the treasury officers in his time used to practice. The most common of them were pratibandha or obstruction, prayoga or loan, vyavahara or trading, avastara or fabrication of accounts, pariahapana or causing less revenue and thereby affecting the treasury, upabhoga or embezzling funds for self enjoyment, and apahara or defalcation. He uses a nice metaphor too "Just like one cannot resist tasting the drop of honey or poison that finds itself on the tip of the tongue, a government servant can never resist devouring even a bit of the king's revenue. Just as fish moving under water cannot possibly be found out either as drinking or not drinking water, so government servants employed in the government work cannot be found out while taking money for themselves."

Legal Punishments for Corruptions in Ancient IndiaThere were a wide range of legal punishments for corruptions in ancient India for the depletion of treasury monetary, corporal, and even sentences to death. Sometimes corrupt police officers would let the prisoners break away after taking a healthy amount of bribe. However, if they were caught, both the escaping prisoner and the corrupt police official were sentenced to death at the same time.Considering the present day situation of law and order in a number of agitated places in India, as well as the general corruption on the part of some police officers, one can quite confidently conclude that the age of the Arthasastra was quite good enough as it was successful in reducing the number of such cases.

The accountants of all sections, departments and tiers needed to submit their accounts and audit reports to their respective higher officials on a regular basis. The work officers or the Karmikas needed to report the details to the Officer in Charge of Accounts, or the Karanika, every year. In Police Administration in Ancient India, K. K. Mishra has explicitly shown how they were punished for lack in their parts in audits and related jobs "If they did not turn up for this purpose and came without the account books or balance sheets properly arranged, they were to be fined ten times of the amount involved. Again, if the work-officer presented himself with the records for being audited but the accounts-officer was not ready for audit, he (accounts-officer) was to be imposed the fine of the first amercement."Passing counterfeit coins as genuine ones was also widely practiced, but werent met with punishments often, very much like the circumstances prevalent today.

The British Period

Administrative corruption was rife among public servants under British rule. During the early stages of British rule in India, corruption was quite rampant among the officers of the East India Company and of the British government. During the period of war money was spent for procuring essential supplies. It created unprecedented opportunities for dishonest officers and unscrupulous contractors to acquire wealth by illegal means. The wartime scarcities coupled with controls and licensing system provided ample opportunities for bribery and corruption.When His Majesty's government took over the reins of the government from the Company, it applied the same principle to its own Indian staff through which it ruled this huge (then undivided) nation from Peshawar to Dhaka to Kanyakumari. Keep the officers and men happy to win their loyalty was their motto. What is called bribe today was then called a fee or commission, and was given openly across the table and not, as now, under it.So far as the British rulers were concerned, bribery was not an issue at all. It only enabled the government to keep its employees contented with small salaries and run the administration on a low budget while allowing the employees to help themselves with extra pickings from the public as perks of their jobs.A "black money" culture also evolved over time. Taxation rates during both the Mughal and British periods were extortionate. There were taxes on land, on trees, on cattle, on marriage, etc. The Mughals had 40 different taxes. Both Mughal and British tax collectors (the zamindars) used to go to villages and impose tax on the appearance of prosperity. It was natural for people to hide their wealth. The combination of these factors and a shortage economy resulted in the phenomenon continuing.

The Post-Independence PeriodIn his magnum opus Discovery of India (1946), the first prime minister of free India, Jawahar Lal Nehru expressed his own anguish in detail about the corruption prevailing during British Rule. According to Nehru, loot (plunder) was the only objective of early British India colonials. The teeming millions of India were awfully poor and growing poorer while the microscopic minority was prospering under colonial rule. Corruption, cruelty, callousness and a complete disregard of public welfare flourish and poison the air, Nehru observed.In 1950, A.D. Gorwalas report observed that quite a few of Nehru's own ministers were corrupt. The Santhanam Committee, 1962 also pointed to the fact that ministers had enriched themselves illegitimately through nepotism. The Government of India tried its best to shield its ministers. V K Krishna Menon, the Indian High Commissioner to Britain in the early 1950s, bypassed protocol to sign a deal worth INR (Indian Rupee) 8 million with a foreign firm for the purchase of army jeeps. While most of the money was paid up front, only a part of the total volume was supplied. Jawahar Lal Nehru, now prime minister of India, forced the government to accept them. Soon after, in February 1956 Krishna Menon was inducted into the Nehru cabinet.Tavleen Sigh in her 2011 article Time for dynastic democracy to die has judiciously observed that:When a parliamentary constituency becomes an inheritance, it becomes a private estate whose purpose is to benefit the family who owns it. And, the reason why most of our political parties have been turned into private property is because politics is the easiest way to make money in India." Thus mass-scale distribution of favours and concessions coupled by reciprocal favours, concessions, bribes, etc., triggered various corruptions and, inter alia, dependence on crimes and criminals became inevitable. The findings of British historian Patrick French in his 2011 survey are still quite consistent with the prerequisites of a dynastic democracy. Every Indian MP under the age of 30 is hereditary and two-thirds of Indian MPs under the age of 40 are from political families.During the early 1950s, Indira Gandhi served as an unofficial personal assistant to her father Jawahar Lal Nehru, the then prime minister. In 1955, she became a member of the Congress Party's working committee and within four years, president of the party. This was a formative period, both for the country and the emerging Nehru-Gandhi dynasty. To mimic the tenets of a socialist democracy, massive investments were diverted in building social infrastructure like dams, national highways, mines, and so forth, dubbed as temples of modern India, seeming to replicate the Soviet model of planning. The licensing machinery was often the prime mover behind the parallel economy of corruption and black money. Nehru died in 1964, and was succeeded as prime minister by Lal Bahadur Shastri. In 1966, Prime Minister Shastri died unexpectedly during his official visit to Moscow. Indira Gandhi became the new Prime Minister. By 1973 vast areas of Northern India, including the capital city, New Delhi, were rocked by demonstrations against high inflation, the poor state of the economy, rampant corruption, and poor standards of living. In June 1975, the High Court of Allahabad declared her guilty of illegal practices during the last election campaign, and ordered her to vacate her seat. There were demands for her resignation and Indira Gandhi's response was to declare a state of emergency to suspend democracy for an indefinite period. Political opponents were imprisoned and press was subjected to strict censorship. During the emergency, Indira Gandhis second son Sanjay's influence on Indira and the government increased dramatically. According to Mark Tully, "His inexperience did not stop him from using the draconian powers his mother, Indira Gandhi, had taken to terrorise the administration, setting up what was in effect a police state. Indira Gandhi, holding both the posts of the Prime Minister and party president, herself controlled the party funds, creating the precedent for engendering money power in politics. After Indira Gandhis assassination in October 1984, her elder son Rajiv Gandhi was the natural choice to grace the office of prime minister of India. V.P. Singh, Rajiv Gandhis finance minister, appointed an American detective agency, Fairfax, to investigate the illegal stacking of foreign exchange overseas by Indians. Rajiv promptly transferred V.P. Singh from finance to defence. When as Defence Minister V.P. Singh, ordered another enquiry into various transactions, this was regarded as a body blow directed at the first family of the nation, since Prime Minister Indira Gandhi herself had been defence minister in 1981. There was criticism of Singhs conduct in the Cabinet meeting, and he soon resigned from government. A few days later, on 16 April 1987, the Bofors scandal surfaced.Rajiv Gandhi and several others were accused of receiving kickbacks, and there was speculation that the amount was to the tune of INR400 million, from Swedish company Bofors AB in reward for a contract to supply the Government of India with 155 mm field howitzer guns. Sten Lindstrom, Sweden's special prosecutor investigating the pay-offs associated with the sale of weapons by Bofors to the Government of India, revealed that a close friend of Rajiv Gandhis Italian wife Sonia Gandhi, Ottavio Quattrocchi had received kickbacks in the millions. Quattrocchi, in spite of substantial evidence against him, had managed to escape prosecution in India. Rajiv gave no public denial of his and his familys involvement.[footnoteRef:9] [9: Arun G.Mukhopadhyay, India: dynasty, corruption and plunder, 11 March 2012.]

Chapter 12Laws relating to Corruption(i) The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988:

The Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Corruption Act) was enacted to consolidate different anti-corruption provisions from various pieces of legislation under one umbrella and to make them more effective. The Corruption Act, inter alia, widened the scope of the definition of a public servant; enhanced penalties provided for offences in earlier laws; incorporated the provisions of freezing of suspected property during trial; mandated trial on a day-to-day basis, prohibited the grant of stay on trial; etc. The Corruption Act is the main law for dealing with offences pertaining to corruption in India, however many avenues of corruption cannot be dealt with under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

(ii) The Indian Penal Code, 1860:

Section 161 to 165 of IPC deals with various offences of corruption and this is the first step to fight against corruption committed by the public servants.

Section 161 of IPC deals with a public servant who accepts or obtains or agrees to accept from any person for himself or for any other person any gratification other than the legal remuneration.

Section 162 of IPC deals with a person who accepts or obtains or agrees to accept or attempts to obtain for himself or for any other person any gratification by corrupt or illegal means to influence a public servant.

Section 163 of IPC deals with a person who accepts or obtains or agrees to accept or attempts to obtain for himself or for any other person any gratification for inducing and by exercise of personal influence with any public servant.

Section 164 of IPC deals with abetment of offence of sec.162 and 163 IPC.

Section 165 of IPC deals with a public servant who accepts or obtains or agrees to accept or attempts to obtain for himself or for any other person any valuable thing without any consideration or less consideration.

(iv) India and the United Nations Convention against Corruption 2003 (UNCAC):

India has welcomed the UNCAC, which provides for international co-operation and mutual legal assistance in investigating cases of corruption and recovery of assets. India signed the UNCAC in December 2005. By signing the Convention India has reiterated its resolve to strengthen international co-operation as envisaged in the Convention. It is in the process of enactment of requisite enabling legislations by the concerned Ministries or Departments before ratifying the Convention. Once ratified, the Convention will boost Indias effort and commitment to fight corruption at both domestic and international level.

(v) The Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002 (Article 23 of the UNCAC):

Many public servants are able to hold their ill-gotten wealth in foreign countries, which they subsequently transfer to their homeland through money laundering, disguising them as funds, apparently from a legal source. This Act empowers the Directorate of Enforcement, India, and Financial Intelligence Unit, India, both agencies of the Government of India, to investigate and prosecute such persons under the said Act.

(vi) The Foreign Exchange Management Act 1999:Middlemen or touts, who take huge commissions for brokering deals pertaining to purchases from foreign suppliers, often transfer such money in foreign currencies, claiming it to be the proceeds of some business abroad. This Act empowers the Directorate of Enforcement, India to investigate and prosecute such persons under the said act.

(vii) The Right to Information Act 2005:It is a well-known fact that too much secrecy in public administration breeds corruption. The Right to Information Act aims at ensuring efficiency, transparency and accountability in public life. This Act requires all public authorities, except the ones that handle work relating to national security, to publish all information about their functioning at regular intervals through various means of communication, including the Internet. Now any person can seek any information from the concerned public authority just by filing an application at almost at no cost. The public authority has to reply to the application compulsorily within 30 days. If the information sought is denied, the applicant has a right to agitate further before the appellate authorities under this Act. This can indeed be described as a revolutionary step towards the eradication of corruption from public life.

(viii) India and the United Nations Convention against Corruption 2003 (UNCAC):India has welcomed the UNCAC, which provides for international co-operation and mutual legal assistance in investigating cases of corruption and recovery of assets. India signed the UNCAC in December 2005. By signing the Convention India has reiterated its resolve to strengthen international co-operation as envisaged in the Convention. It is in the process of enactment of requisite enabling legislations by the concerned Ministries or Departments before ratifying the Convention. Once ratified, the Convention will boost Indias effort and commitment to fight corruption at both domestic and international level.

(ix) Cases referred by the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) and the Chief Vigilance Officers (CVOs) of other Government Departments:The Central Vigilance Commission is a statutory body which monitors corruption in governmental departments. It supervises the work of Chief Vigilance Officers of all the departments of government and issues guidelines to them. The CVC also receives complaints from the general public about corruption. It refers such complaints to the CBI for verification and investigation if found to contain verifiable allegations. The CVOs are in-house supervisors of government departments who monitor the conduct of personnel and enquire into complaints against them pertaining to corruption. If upon enquiry they conclude that a criminal case under the Corruption Act appears to have been made out, they refer the case to the CBI for investigation.

(x) Use of Telephonic/Electronic Surveillance:The legal provisions relating to telephonic or electronic surveillance under the Indian Telegraph Act 1885 are effectively used by the CBI to gather accurate information about corrupt activities of the public servants. After ascertaining details about various phone numbers and email identifications used by the public servant, permission of the competent authority is taken to put the same under surveillance. Information gathered during such surveillance has been successfully used in exposing big scams.

(xi) Freezing, Seizure and Confiscation of Properties - The Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance, 1944 (Article 31 of UNCAC):This is an important law on freezing, seizure and confiscation of properties which are proceeds of crime, including offences under the Corruption Act. Such properties identified during investigation can be frozen under this law. Properties can remain frozen till disposal of the case by the court after completion of the investigation. If the alleged offence is proved in the court of law and the property is proved to be the proceeds of crime, the court will order its confiscation.

(xii) Criminal Procedure Code 1973 together with Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLAT) in Criminal Matters and Extradition Treaties:Sec. 166 A and 166 B of the above code empower the crime investigation agencies of India to make requests to other countries as well as to entertain requests from other countries to render assistance in the investigation of crime registered in the respective countries. Such letters of request are popularly known as Letters Rogatory. Such Letters Rogatory are executed on the basis of Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties and Extradition Treaties India has signed with other countries. To date India has Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties in Criminal Matters with 20 countries and Extradition Treaties with 25 countries. The Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties invariably have a chapter on asset recovery and sharing the same. With other countries, international co-operation is sought on the basis of guarantee of reciprocity.Punishment under IPC and Prevention of Corruption ActNo.Indian Penal CodePunishmentPrevention of Corruption Act, 1988Punishment

1Section 1613 YearsSection 7Not less than six months. May extend to 5 Years.

2Section 1623 YearsSection 8Not less than six months. May extend to 5 Years.

3Section 163Section 9Not less than six months. May extend to 5 Years.

4Section 1643 YearsSection 10Not less than six months. May extend to 5 Years.

5Section 1653 YearsSection 11Not less than six months. May extend to 5 Years.

6Section 165A3 YearsSection 12Not less than six months. May extend to 5 Years.

Chapter 13Facts, Figures and a Brief Comparison

Cases of graft registered with the CBI against government servants have been steadily on the rise in the past four years. Statistics with the government show corruption cases against government servants have risen from 17.68% in 2008 to 28.39% in 2011.The figure had shot up to 22.44% in 2009, but fell to 19.72% in 2010. It has picked up again as per statistics till June 30, 2011. In the past four years, 3,621 cases were registered against government officers and other persons with the CBI. There were 991 cases registered in 2008; 1,119 in 2009 and 1,009 in 2010.So far this year, the CBI has registered 502 cases.There has been a decline in the number of cases registered with the CBI against people other than government servants. The percentage of cases for such people was 52.86% of all cases in 2008. The figures were 39.15% and 44.67% in 2009 and 2010 respectively. It has dropped to 41.97% this year.The disposal rate of the CBI in corruption cases has also seen a drop from 33.49% in 2008 to 25.62% this year.[footnoteRef:10] [10: DNA, Zee Research Group]

The figures for 2009 and 2010 were 38.68% and 41.39%. While replying to a written question in the Rajya Sabha, V Narayanswamy, minister of state for the ministry of personnel, public grievances and pension, said: No centralized data is maintained with respect to searches carried out by the CBI while investigating the case.For years, the government has been unsuccessfully trying to address the issue of corruption among public servants. In 1966, the government formed the administrative reforms commission to revamp the public administrative system. To reduce corruption, the second administrative reforms commission was formed in 2005 with former law minister Veerappa Moily as the chairman.We gave several recommendations to improve governance in our country, but the government did not implement many of them, alleged V Ramachandran, member of the second administrative reforms commission. Things could have been different had the government followed instructions completely. The current political crisis over the Lokpal Bill could have been avoided had the government processed the bill three years ago as per our recommendation.The second administrative commission in its fourth report - Ethics in governance - submitted to the government in January 2007, had recommended establishment of a Lokpal institution. The commission was of the view that the Lokpal should be a three-member body and had recommended that the prime ministers conduct must be scrutinized by the Lokpal.. According to the latest ranking by Transparency International, India is still listed with the most corrupt nations of the world. However, one can take solace in the fact that its ranked above its neighbouring countries (minus Sri Lanka). India has been ranked 95th by Transparency International while Sri Lanka is at 93, Pakistan is at 143 and Bangladesh is ranked at 134. Amongst the SAARC countries, Nepal is ranked at 146. Amongst the developed economies, Russia is the most corrupt nation with the rank of 154. Earlier, India was ranked at the 84th position but the corruption charges in the Commonwealth Games took its toll on Indias ranking.U.S.A. has been ranked 22nd, U.K. is at the 20th position while Denmark, New Zealand and Singapore are the most honest nations sharing the 1st position.The following is brief information about the ranking of a few countries:(High scores mean that the country is less corrupt and low mean more corrupt)

1Denmark9.3

1New Zealand9.3

1Singapore9.3

6Canada8.9

8Australia 8.7

8Switzerland8.7

15Germany7.9

17Japan7.8

20UK7.6

22USA7.1

25France6.8

28UAE6.3

54SA4.5

69Brazil3.7

78China3.5

91Sri Lanka3.3

95India3.1

105Argentina2.9

134Bangladesh2.4

143Pakistan2.3

146Nepal2.2

154Russia2.1

178Somalia1.1

Nor is the country well organized to combat corruption: A multiplicity of overlapping anti-corruption agencies, and dilatory legal processes for tackling cases, has made it difficult to bring the corrupt to book. Indias campaign finance regime also has potentially negative effects on service delivery: The unregulated cost of elections - and the lack of legitimate funding sources, including a system of public funding - has created incentives to extract rents from administrative functions, including the delivery of services, to fund campaign expenses or pay back contributors. Despite, these systemic problems, many innovations in service delivery have taken place in different sectors and states with positive results for citizens, as this report shows.Further:1.6 The lack of accountability in turn provides opportunities for corruption. India ranked in ninetieth place in Transparency Internationals Corruption Perception Index (CPI) in 2005. Nor is the country well organized to combat corruption: A multiplicity of anti-corruption institutions with overlapping functions undermines their coherence: A patchwork of Lok Ayuktas, State Vigilance Commissions, and Anti-Corruption Bureaus with widely varying functions constitutes the system for punishing corruption in India's states. Because law and order is a state subject, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) cannot pursue corruption allegations against a member of the All-India Services, including the IAS, without state government permission. Departmental disciplinary processes are weak: Civil servants have misused Article 311 of the Constitution, which provides protection against wrongful dismissal, to draw out cases against them to extreme lengths, making it difficult to remove a government servant for non-performance. The Hota Committee on Administrative Reforms has recommended that Article 3 11 be amended to allow for the expedited removal of civil servants involved in corruption cases.[footnoteRef:11] [11: The World Bank Study on Reforming Public Services in India (Feb 2006)]

Chapter 14Agencies to check Corruption1. Central Vigilance Commission

Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) is an apex Indian governmental body created in 1964 to address governmental corruption. It has the status of an autonomous body, free of control from any executive authority, charged with monitoring all vigilance activity under the Central Government of India, and advising various authorities in central Government organisations in planning, executing, reviewing and reforming their vigilance work.It was set up by the Government of India in February, 1964 on the recommendations of the Committee on Prevention of Corruption (also known as the Santhanam Committee), headed by Shri K. Santhanam, to advise and guide Central Government agencies in the field of vigilance. Nittoor Srinivasa Rau was selected as the first Chief Vigilance Commissioner of India.The Annual Report of the CVC not only gives the details of the work done by it but also brings out the system failures which leads to corruption in various Departments/ Organisations, system improvements, various preventive measures and cases in which the Commission's advises were ignored etc.

RoleThe CVC is not an investigating agency, and it either gets the investigation done through the CBI or through the Departmental Chief Vigilance Officers. The only investigation carried out by the CVC is that of examining Civil Works of the Government which is done through the Chief Technical Officer. Corruption investigations against government officials can proceed only after the government permits them. The CVC publishes a list of cases where permissions are pending, some of which may be more than a year old.The CVC has also been publishing a list of corrupt government officials against which it has recommended punitive action. A few years after the murder of IIT Kanpur alumnus NHAI engineer Satyendra Dubey, the CVC launched an initiative to protect whistleblowers. However, this program has been criticized by ex-Chief Justice of India R.C. Lahoti as being ineffective.AppointmentThe Central Vigilance Commissioner and the Vigilance Commissioners shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal; provided that every appointment under this sub-section shall be made after obtaining the recommendation of a Committee consisting of: The Prime Minister Chairperson. The Minister of Home Affairs Member. The Leader of the Opposition in the House of the People (The Lok Sabha) Member.RemovalThe Central Vigilance Commissioner or any Vigilance Commissioner shall be removed from his office only by order of the President on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity after the Supreme Court, on a reference made to it by the President, has, on inquiry, reported that the Central Vigilance Commissioner or any Vigilance Commissioner, as the case may be, ought on such ground be removed. The President may suspend from office, and if deem necessary prohibit also from attending the office during inquiry, the Central Vigilance Commissioner or any Vigilance Commissioner in respect of whom a reference has been made to the Supreme Court until the President has passed orders on receipt of the report of the Supreme Court on such reference. The President may, by order, remove from office the Central Vigilance Commissioner or any Vigilance Commissioner if the Central Vigilance Commissioner or such Vigilance Commissioner, as the case may be: is adjudged an insolvent; or has been convicted of an offence which, in the opinion of the Central Government, involves moral turpitude; or engages during his term of office in any paid employment outside the duties of his office; or is, in the opinion of the President, unfit to continue in office by reason of infirmity of mind or body; or Has acquired such financial or other interest as is likely to affect prejudicially his functions as a Central Vigilance Commissioner or a Vigilance Commissioner.OrganisationThe Central Vigilance Commission has its own Secretariat, Chief Technical Examiners' Wing (CTE) and a wing of Commissioners for Departmental Inquiries (CDI).SecretariatThe Secretariat consists of a Secretary of the rank of Additional Secretary to the GOI, one officer of the rank of Joint Secretary to the GOI, ten officers of the rank of Director/Deputy Secretary, four Under Secretaries and office staff.Chief Technical Examiners' Wing (CTE)The Chief Technical Examiner's Organisation constitutes the technical wing of the Central Vigilance Commission (India) and is manned by two Engineers of the rank of Chief Engineers (designated as Chief Technical Examiners) with supporting engineering staff. The main functions assigned to this organisation are: Technical audit of construction works of Governmental organisations from a vigilance angle; Investigation of specific cases of complaints relating to construction works; Extension of assistance to CBI in their investigations involving technical matters and for evaluation of properties in Delhi; and Tendering of advice/assistance to the Commission and Chief Vigilance Officers in vigilance cases involving technical matters.There are fifteen posts of Commissioners for Departmental Inquiries (CDI) in the Commission, 14 in the rank of Deputy Secretaries/Directors and one in the rank of Joint Secretary to Government of India. The CDIs function as Inquiry Officers to conduct inquiries in departmental proceedings initiated against public servants.

2. Central Bureau of Investigation

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is a governmental agency belonging to Government of India that serves as both a criminal investigation body, national security agency and intelligence agency. The CBI is a premier investigating police agency in India. It is an elite force playing a major role in preservation of values in public life and in ensuring the health of the national economy. It is also the nodal police agency in India which coordinates investigation on behalf of Interpol Member countries. The services of its investigating officers are sought for all major investigations in the country.The agency was established in 1941 as the Special Police Establishment. Central Bureau of Investigation was later established on 1 April 1963. Its motto is "Industry, Impartiality, Integrity".The agency headquarters is the new-state-of-the-art building, located in New Delhi. The agency has other field offices located in major cities throughout the India. The CBI is controlled by the Department of Personnel and Training in the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension of the Union Government usually headed by a Union Minister who reports directly to the Prime Minister. While analogous in structure to the FBI, the CBI's powers and function are severely limited to specific crimes based on Acts (mainly the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946). The CBI is the official Interpol unit for India.

HistoryThe Central Bureau of Investigation traces its origin to the Special Police Establishment (SPE) which was set up in 1941 by the Government of India. The functions of the SPE were to investigate cases of bribery and corruption in transactions with the War & Supply Department of India, which was set up during the course of World War II, with its headquarters at Lahore. The Superintendent of War Department and SPE was Khan Bahadur Qurban Ali Khan who later on became the Governor of North West Frontier Province on the creation of Pakistan. The first legal advisor of War Department was Rai Sahib Karam Chand Jain. Even after the end of the War, the need for a Central Government agency to investigate cases of bribery and corruption by Central Government employees was felt. Rai Sahib Karam Chand Jain continued to remain the Legal Advisor when this department was later transferred to the Home Department under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act brought into force in 1946.The scope of SPE was enlarged to cover all departments of the Govt. of India. The jurisdiction of the SPE extended to all the Union Territories and could be extended also to the States with the consent of the State Government concerned. Sardar Patel who was the Deputy Prime Minister of free India and was incharge of the Home Department took special interest in weeding out corruption from the erstwhile princely states like Jodhpur, Rewa, Tonk etc. Sardar Patel directed the Legal Advisor Karam Chand Jain to monitor the criminal proceedings against the Dewans/ Chief Ministers of these states.

D.P. Kohli as directorThe founder director of the CBI was D.P. Kohli who held office from 1 April 1963 to 31 May 1968. Before this, he was Inspector General of Police of the Special Police Establishment from 1955 to 1963. Before that he held responsible positions in police in Madhya Bharat, Uttar Pradesh and Govt. of India. He was Police Chief in Madhya Bharat before joining the SPE. Kohli was awarded 'Padma Bhushan' in 1967 for his distinguished services.Kohli was a visionary who saw in the Special Police Establishment the potential of growing into the national investigative agency. He nurtured the organisation during his long stint as Inspector General and as Director and laid the solid foundation on which the organisation grew over the decades to become what it is today.CBI takes shapeAs the CBI, over the years, established a reputation of being India's premier investigative agency with adequate resources to deal with complicated cases, demands were made on it to take up investigation of more cases of conventional crime such as murder, kidnapping, terrorism, etc. Apart from this, the Supreme Court and even the various High Courts of the country also started entrusting such cases for investigation to the CBI on petitions filed by aggrieved parties. Taking into account the fact that several cases falling under this category were being taken up for investigation by the CBI, it was found expedient to entrust such cases to the Branches having local jurisdiction.It was therefore decided in 1987 to constitute two investigation divisions in the CBI, namely, Anti-Corruption Division and Special Crimes Division, the latter dealing with cases of conventional crime, besides economic offences. The CBI is a central subject under the Constitution of India, meaning that it reports to the Indian Government and not to the individual states.DirectorAs of November 30, 2010 the director of CBI is former Indian Police Service officer Amar Pratap Singh. He replaced Ashwani Kumar.

Organisation and rank structure

Organisation chart for the CBIThe CBI is headed by a Director, an IPS Officer of the rank of Director General of Police or Commissioner of Police (State). Director is selected based on the procedure laid down by CVC Act 2003 and has a tenure of 2 years. The other important ranks in the CBI can be also handled by IRS officers are Special Director, Additional Director, Joint Director, Deputy Inspector General of Police, Senior Superintendent of Police, Superintendent of Police, Additional Superintendent of Police, Deputy Superintendent of Police. The rest are recruited directly by the CBI, Inspector, Sub-Inspector, Assistant Sub-Inspector, Head Constable, Senior Constable and Constable.According to annual reports Staff of CBI is usually divided between Ministerial staff, Ex-cadre posts which are usually of technical nature, Executive Staff and EDP Staff. Hindi Bhasha staff belongs to the Department of official languages.Ministerial Staff includes LDC, UDC, and Crime Assistants etc. Executive Staff includes Constables, ASI, Sub-Inspectors, and Inspectors etc. EDP Staff includes Data Entry Operators, Data Processing Assistants, Assistant Programmers, Programmers and SSA.Jurisdiction powers, privileges and liabilitiesThe legal powers of investigation of CBI are derived from the DSPE Act 1946. This Act confers concurrent and coextensive powers, duties, privileges and liabilities on the members of Delhi Special Police Establishment (CBI) with Police Officers of the Union Territories. The Central Government may extend to any area, besides Union Territories, the powers and jurisdiction of members of the CBI for investigation subject to the consent of the Government of the concerned State. While exercising such powers, members of the CBI of or above the rank of Sub Inspector shall be deemed to be officers in charge of Police Stations of respective jurisdictions. The CBI can investigate only such of the offences as are notified by the Central Government under the DSPE Act.Jurisdiction of CBI vis-a-vis State PoliceLaw and Order is a State subject and the basic jurisdiction to investigate crime lies with State Police. Besides, due to limited resources, CBI would not be able to investigate crimes of all kind. CBI may investigate: Cases which are essentially against Central Govt. employees or concerning affairs of the Central Govt. and the employees of the Central Public Sector Undertakings and Public Sector Banks. Cases in which the financial interests of the Central Government are involved. Cases relating to the breaches of Central Laws with the enforcement of which the Government of India is mainly concerned. Big cases of fraud, cheating, embezzlement and the like relating to companies in which large funds are involved and similar other cases when committed by organised gangs or professional criminals having ramifications in several States. Cases having interstate and international ramifications and involving several official agencies where, from all angles, it is considered necessary that a single investigating agency should be in charge of the investigation.

Corruption in CBIBecause of its intensely political overtones, it has been exposed by its former bigwigs like Joginder Singh and BR Lall who were Director and Joint Director respectively, to be engaging in nepotism, mal-prosecution and outright corruption. In his book, Who Owns CBI, BR Lall, an honest and upright officer details the modus operandi of manipulating and derailing investigation. This organisation has become synonymous with corruption as information obtained under the RTI Act has revealed. Even the Top Bosses are known for stooping to illegal fund diversions. RTI activist Krishnanand Tripathi has alleged harassment from CBI in order to save itself from exposure through RTI. CBI has now been exempted from RTI act. ControversiesNormally, cases assigned to the CBI are sensitive and of national importance. It is a usual practice for the respective state police departments, to initially register any case coming under its jurisdiction, and if necessary, through mediation by the central government, the cases may be transferred to the CBI. The CBI handles many high profile cases, and is never far from controversy. The CBI has come under severe criticism recently for its mishandling of several scams.

Bofors scandalIn January 2006, it was found that CBI had quietly unfrozen bank accounts of Italian businessman Ottavio Quattrocchi, one of the prime accused in the Bofors scandal of 1986 which had tainted the Rajiv Gandhi government. The CBI was responsible for the inquiry into the Bofors Case. Associates of then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi were linked to alleged pay-offs made in the mid-1980s by the Swedish arms firm AB Bofors, with $40 million in kickbacks moved from Britain and Panama to secret Swiss banks. The 410 howitzer field guns purchased in the $1,300 million arms sale were reported to be inferior to those offered by a French competitor.The CBI, which unfroze Rs 21 crore in a London bank in accounts held by Bofors scam accused Quattrocchi and his wife Maria in 2006, has facilitated his travel across the globe by asking Interpol to take him off the wanted list on 29 Apr 2009. Following a communication from the CBI, Interpol withdrew the Red Corner Notice against Quattrocchi. The development, that came barely three weeks before the end of the Manmohan Singh governments tenure, brought the issue of the Bofors scandal back to centre stage. It is often suspected that ruling governments interfere with the work of the CBI, and the handling of the Bofors investigation by CBI under Congress governments has created a new synonym for CBI. After letting off the Bofors accused, Oppositions have never tired to call it the 'Congress Bureau of Investigation'. ISRO spy ring caseIn 1994 two scientists with the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) and two Indian businessmen were arrested for allegedly conspiring to sell space secrets to two Maldivian women, who were originally described by newspapers as agents of Pakistani intelligence, for money and sex. The CBI investigation did not reveal the existence of a spy ring, and by early 1995 it was clear that the case was more a product of inexperience and over exuberation on the part of the police and Intelligence Bureau.It was a well planned scheme to remove the then DGP Ramon S by concocted links to Maldivian lady. The scheme was plotted by some officers of Kerala police, the media and Muslim League as DGP was made of sterner stuff. Hawala scandal In 1991 an arrest linked to militants in Kashmir led to a raid on hawala brokers, revealing evidence of large-scale payments to national politicians. The prosecution that followed was partly prompted by a public interest petition (see Vineet Narain), and yet the court cases of the Hawala scandal eventually all collapsed without convictions. The CBI's role was again criticised. In concluding the Vineet Narain case, the Supreme Court of India directed that the Central Vigilance Commission should be given a supervisory role over the CBI. Priyadarshini Mattoo murder caseThe CBI has been under a cloud owing to its handling of the Priyadarshini Mattoo case, in which Santosh Kumar Singh, the alleged murderer of a 22-year old law student was acquitted for what the case judge called "deliberate inaction" by the investigating team. The accused was the son of a high ranking officer in the Indian Police Service, due to which the case had been shifted from the regular police force to the CBI. However, the 1999 judgment commented on how "the influence of the father of the accused has been there".Embarrassed by the judgment, the-then CBI Director, R K Raghavan, requested two Special Directors, P C Sharma and Gopal Achari, to study the judgement. Subsequently the CBI appealed the verdict in Delhi High court in 2000, after which the High Court issued a bailable warrant against the accused. The case was again prominent in 2006 after much media coverage and public bashing (this was mainly due to a similar acquittal in another high profile case, though not handled by the CBI). The CBI filed an application for early hearing in July 2006. The High Court subsequently found Santosh Kumar Singh guilty of rape and murder and awarded a death sentence for the same in October 2006.Nithari KillingsThe CBI was given the responsibility of investigating the murders of dozens of children in the Nithari village near Noida, UP. This was after the local police was found to be incompetent and lethargic in their investigations. The serial killings were in the Indian and international media for weeks since decomposing bodies were found outside the house of the accused Moninder Singh Pandher.Dawood Ibrahim caseIn August 2007, the CBI asked its Pakistani counterpart, the Federal Investigation Agency, for its comments on recent media reports about the detention of Dawood Ibrahim by authorities in Karachi.Sister Abhaya murder caseSister Abhaya murder case concerns a nun, who was found dead in water well in Saint Pius X convent hostel in Kottayam, Kerala on 27 March 1992. Altogether there were five CBI inquiries into the murder case so far without any tangible results.Sohrabuddin caseCBI has been accused of acting for the ruling party Congress (UPA) to trap its opposition party mainly BJP. CBI, which is dealing with the Sohrabuddin case in Gujrat, questioned Geeta Johri an IPS officer, who claims the CBI is pressuring her to falsely implicate former Gujarat Minister Amit Shah in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case, Rajkot Police Commissioner Geeta Johri has alleged in the Supreme Court.Sant Singh Chatwal caseSant Singh Chatwal was an accused in the CBIs records for 14 years. CBI had filed two chargesheets naming him as accused; sent Letters Rogatory abroad; even sent a probe team to the US and put Chatwal and his wife behind bars from February 2 to February 5, 1997. On May 30, 2007 and August 10, 2008, former CBI Director Vijay Shankar and the agencys present Director Ashwani Kumar respectively signed orders saying there was no need to challenge the discharge of Sant Singh Chatwal and his co-accused. This was done in spite of advice of a string of investigators including a Special Director and Joint Director and it was decided not to appeal his discharge. This, in effect, closed the principal case of bank fraud in which Chatwal had been embroiled for over a decade. Along with four others, Chatwal was charged with being part of a criminal conspiracy to defraud the Bank of Indias New York branch to the tune of US $8,992,815 (Rs 28.32 crore). In all, four chargesheets were filed by the CBI, with Chatwal named as accused in two. The trials in the other two cases are still in progress. RTI applicant Krishnanand Tripathi was denied access to public information concerning the closed cases. CIC later ordered the CBI to disclose the information. But CBI has recently been exempted from RTI act and it is unclear if this information will be disclosed. Sant Singh Chatwal has been awarded with Padma Bhushan despite these cases.Malankara Varghese murder caseThe Malankara Varghese murder case concerns the death of T.M.Varghese also known as Malankara Varghese,a member of Malankara Orthodox Church's managing committee and a timber merchant in 5 December 2002.On 9 May 2010 charged Father Varghese Thekkekara,a priest and manager of the Angamali diocese in the rival Jacobite Syrian Christian Church (a part of the Syrian Orthodox Church) with conspiracy in the murder of Malankara Varghese and named him as the prime accused.Till date,the prime accused has not been arrested, CBI is highly being criticized for this by Kerala High Court and Media.

Bhopal gas tragedyThe public perceived that the CBI was very ineffective in trying the Bhopal gas tragedy case. The former CBI joint director B. R. Lall has now confessed that he was asked to remain soft on extraditing the Union Carbide CEO Warren Anderson, and dropped charges, including culpable homicide, against those accused in this case, who received two year sentences. 2G Spectrum ScamRadio spectrum which is a precious and scarce natural resource of national importance was allotted by UPA government at throwaway prices to companies through corrupt and illegal means. Supreme Court of India pulled up the CBI many times for its tardy progress in the investigations. It was only after the SC decided to monitor its investigations that CBI moved faster and arrests of high profile persons were made.

3. Election CommissionThe Election Commission of India is an autonomous, quasi-judicial, constitutional body of India charged with administering major electoral processes in India. Under the supervision of the commission, free and fair elections have been held in India at regular intervals as per the principles enshrined in the Constitution. Election Commission of India is a permanent body governed by rules specified in the constitution. The Election Commission was established on 25th January 1950. The Election Commission has the power of superintendence, direction and control of all elections to parliament and the state legislatures and of elections to the office of the President and Vice-President. The commission consists of a Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and two Election Commissioners, appointed by the president of India. Two additional Commissioners were appointed to the commission for the first time on 16th October 1989 but they had a very short tenure till 1st January 1990. Later, on 1st October 1993, two additional Election Commissioners were appointed. The concept of multi-member Commission has been in operation since then, with decision making power by majority vote. The current CEC is Dr. S. Y. Quraishi.The Chief Election Commissioner can be removed from his office by Parliament with two-thirds majority in Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity. The Election Commission consists of a Chief Election Commissioner and such other Commissioners as the President may, from time to time, fix. Other Election Commissioners can be removed by the President on the recommendation of the Chief Election Commissioner. The Chief Election Commissioner and the two Election Commissioners draw salaries and allowances at par with those of the Judges of the Supreme Court of India as per the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1992. All three commissioners have equal rights of decision making.

Functions1. Follow the Constitutional duties for conducting the free, fair and peaceful elections to the Parliament and the State Legislatures under Article 324 of the Constitution of India.2. Ensure that political party(ies) in power, including ruling parties at the Centre and in the States and contesting candidates follow the Model Code Of Conduct.3. Ensure that official machinery is not misused for electoral purposes.4. Ensure that electoral offenses, malpractices and corrupt practices such as impersonation, bribing and inducement of voters, threat and intimidation to the voters are prevented by all means.Model Code of ConductThe Model Code of Conduct for guidance of political parties and candidates is a set of norms which has been evolved with the consensus of political parties who have consented to abide by the principles embodied in the said code and also binds them to respect and observe it in its letter and spirit.Applicability of Code during General Elections and By-electionsCode of conduct is applicable during: General elections to House of People (Lok Sabha): The code is applicable throughout the country. General elections to the Legislative Assembly (Vidhan Sabha): The code is applicable in the entire State. By-elections: The code is applicable in the entire district or districts in which the constituency falls. Budget and ExpenditureThe Secretariat of the Commission has an independent budget, which is finalised directly in consultation between the Commission and the Finance Ministry of the Union Government. The latter generally accepts the recommendations of the Commission for its budgets. The major expenditure on actual conduct of elections is, however, reflected in the budgets of the concerned constituent units of the Union - States and Union Territories. If elections are being held only for the Parliament, the expenditure is borne entirely by the Union Government while for the elections being held only for the State Legislature, the expenditure is borne entirely by the concerned State. In case of simultaneous elections to the Parliament and State Legislature, the expenditure is shared equally between the Union and the State Governments. For Capital equipment, expenditure related to preparation for electoral rolls and the scheme for Electors' Identity Cards too, the expenditure is shared equally. Chief Election Commissioner of IndiaThe Chief Election Commissioner heads the Election Commission of India. The President of India appoints the Chief Election Commissioner and two Election Commissioners. They have tenure of six years, or up to the age of 65 years, whichever is earlier. The Chief Election Commissioner can be removed from office only through impeachment by Parliament.Judicial ReviewThe decisions of the Commission can be challenged in the High court of India and the Supreme Court of India by appropriate petitions. By long standing convention and several judicial pronouncements, once the actual process of elections has started, the judiciary does not intervene in the actual conduct of the polls. Once the polls are completed and result declared, the Commission cannot review any result on its own. This can only be reviewed through the process of an election petition, which can be filed before the High Court, in respect of elections to the Parliament and State Legislatures. In respect of elections for the offices of the President and Vice President, such petitions can only be filed before the Supreme Court.New InitiativesThe Commission has taken several new initiatives in the recent past. Notable among these are: a scheme for use of State owned Electronic Media for broadcast/telecast by Political parties, checking criminalization of politics, computerization of electoral rolls, providing electors with Identity Cards, simplifying the procedure for maintenance of accounts and filling of the same by candidates and a variety of measures for strict compliance of Model Code of Conduct, for providing a level playing field to contestants during the elections.

4. Ministry of Law and JusticeThe Ministry of Law and Justice is a prominent Ministry of Government of India. Under the Government of India (Allocation of Business) Rules of 1961, the Ministry is vested with the responsibility of (i) administration of legal affairs, (ii) justice, and (iii) legislative affairs in India.It is one of the oldest Ministries operating in India. Earlier, in terms of the Charter Act of 1833 enacted by the British Parliament, the Legislative power was vested in a single authority namely the Governor General of India. The Governor General enacted laws for the British India until 1920. The Government of India Act passed in 1919 vested the legislative power to the Indian Legislature constituted there under. Since then the Ministry of Law has been functioning as the sole repository of legal functions of the Government of India.The Ministry is headed by a Cabinet Minister. Recently the Ministry is headed by Mr. Salman Khurshid. The longest serving minister of this ministry in the history of India was Ashoke Kumar Sen who is regarded as the patriarch of Indian law and justice.

StructureThe Government of India (Allocation of Business) Rules of 1961 entail the various departments working under the Ministry of Law and Justice of Government of India. In terms of these Rules, the Ministry comprises the following departments;1. Department of Legal Affairs,2. Legislative Department, and3. Department of Justice.

Department of Legal AffairsThe Dept. of Legal affairs render advice to various ministries on legal matters and attend to litigation on behalf of the Government of India in the Courts. The dept. also looks in to matters regarding the treaties with foreign government in matters of civil laws. It further concerns itself with the appointment of Law Officers of the Union of India, namely Attorney General, Solicitor General and Additional Solicitors General.The Allocation of Business Rules identifies the following functions to be carried out by this Department; Advice to Ministries on legal matters including interpretation of the Constitution and the laws, conveyancing and engagement of counsel to appear on behalf of the Union of India in the High Courts and subordinate courts where the Union of India is a party.1. Attorney General of India, Solicitor General of India, and other Central Government law officers of the States whose services are shared by the Ministries of the Government of India.2. Conduct of cases in the Supreme Court and the High Courts on behalf of the Central Government and on behalf of the Governments of States participating in the Central Agency Scheme.3. Reciprocal arrangements with foreign countries for the service of summons in civil suits, for the execution of decrees of Civil Courts, for the enforcement of maintenance orders, and for the administration of the estates of foreigners dying in India intestate.4. Authorization of officers to execute contracts and assurances and of property on behalf of the President under Article 299(1) of the Constitution, and authorization of officers to sign and verify plaints or written statements in suits by or against the Central Government.5. Indian Legal Service.6. Treaties and agreements with foreign countries in matters of civil law.7. Law Commission of India8. Legal Profession including the Advocates Act, 1961 (25 of 1961) and persons enti