Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Shree. ( Advocate.)     22 April 2008

ANTI-CORRUPTION WORK!!!!!!!!!

ANTI-CORRUPTION WORK

Handling of Corruption: Corruption is being handled from two aspects, preventive and detective. Detection of specific instances of corruption is made possible through complaints from victims, source information, study of income tax returns, immovable property returns and reports of wealth tax, gift tax and indirect taxes. Every organisation is subjected to internal audit as well as statutory audit. Such audit reports throw up cases of corruption. Constitutional bodies such as the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India and Legislative Committees such as Estimates Committee, Public Accounts Committee and the Committee on Public Undertakings take up review from time to time on the performance of each department/public sector undertaking and go into the aspect of propriety in all transactions. Scrutiny of these reports also leads to initiation of corruption cases. The following are the anti-corruption works done by the DVAC.

Traps: It is a very effective tool in the fight against corruption, at the cutting edge level of the Administration because it has an immediate telling effect not only on the corrupt Public Servant involved in the matter but also acts as a deterrent for others. On receipt of a specific complaint that a particular Public Servant is demanding bribe for doing or omitting to do his official duties and the same is about to be paid, a trap is organized to catch him red handed. After verifying the genuineness of the complainant and the antecedents of the Public Servant complained against, the DVAC officials in the presence of independent witnesses organize a trap. Once the trap materializes, the Public Servant is arrested and criminal proceedings are initiated against him. Significantly, the law gives immunity to the complainant, who participates in the trap, wherein he is required to hand over the demanded money or any other material gratification/obligation to the suspect officer, on the direction of the Investigating Officer of the DVAC.

Disproportionate Assets/ Criminal Misconduct: Corruption being collusive in nature, not many people come forward to lodge complaint of specific demands by public servants. The only alternative way to bring such public servants to book is to investigate into their assets. This is mostly used against senior officers. It is difficult to trap them because they don’t take money directly. On the other hand, they invest the ill-gotten money in movable and immovable properties, which are easy to identify. In this method a public servant is targeted on the basis of his general reputation for lack of integrity. In the investigation, evidence is collected on a suspected public servant’s assets, income earned and expenditure incurred to arrive at assets disproportionate to known sources of income. In grave cases, the properties are attached to the Government through court orders. There is also provision for confiscation of disproportionate assets after successful prosecution. 

Abuse of Authority / Criminal Misconduct: Corruption is also unearthed by probing into instances of abuse of authority by a public servant. It is ascertained whether such abuse was committed with a view to causing pecuniary gain to himself or any one else and corresponding loss to the Government. Material for such probe is collected from files relating to award of contracts, supply orders, purchase orders, etc. Instances where the lower bids were rejected without valid reasons, where knowingly substandard material is accepted, where tax is evaded by private persons/corporate houses with the connivance of tax enforcement officials, etc., usually come under the orbit of such investigation. Once the scrutiny of the file disclosed prima facie abuse of authority coupled with pecuniary gain to an individual and corresponding loss to the Government, regular investigation is launched to cover the public servants and private individuals involved. 

 While for traps, a complainant is necessary, cases of disproportionate assets and abuse of authority/criminal misconduct can be initiated on the basis of source information as well.



Learning

 9 Replies

SANJAY DIXIT (Advocate)     22 April 2008

Nice work. Thanks Shreeram.

FARID (self empoled)     23 April 2008

Thanks Mr.shreeram for your very useful information

CA. SHIKHA (CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT)     29 May 2008

VERY USEFUL INFORMATION

prabodh kumar patel (advocate)     19 November 2008

Really nice.

Anil Agrawal (Retired)     15 February 2009

 I think you are too good a gentleman to have suffered at the hands of corrupt bureaucracy and judiciary.

Y V Vishweshwar Rao (Advocate )     23 March 2009

  Thaks -it Very useful information to the Citizens

Anil Agrawal (Retired)     23 March 2009

 What is stated is legal position. Keep your hand on the heart and say whether you have obtained ration card, water connection, electricity connection, birth and dead certificate, income tax refund, driving licence, passport, approval to building plan, occupation certificate, admission to your wards, railway reservation, getting work done in sales tax office, octroi, excise and so on.


Have we not seen the drama of Manmohan Singh going to RTO and getting his driving licence renewed?

Anil Agrawal (Retired)     23 March 2009

 Two years ago, I got information under RTI Act that staff working with Central Ministers were lotting the public sector undertakings under their administrative control by getting mobile phones, cars with drivers, free air journeys, accommodation, getting their houses furnished at PSU's cost and PSUs were paying hefty phone bills and hotel costs.


I complained to the Central Vigilance Commission which gave me an acknowledgement number of the complaint.


Thereafter, Mera Bharat Mahaan. Jai Ho. Hell with my reminders about action taken. And we talk of corruption and law.

A.Mohamed Thaheer (ADVOCATE)     31 March 2009

Sir,


Whether the following case study will fall under the category of criminal misconduct. Please explain.


 


"X"  working in a Govt.Department has paid an amount of Rs.11,255/- to a company for repairing of a machine obtained on loan basis with the approval of the higher authority, since "X" had to power to incur an expenditure for more thanRs.2,000/- for carrying out such repairs. The amount was passed on to the firm through Demand Draft directly by the Director of Accounts and Treasuries of the concerned Govt.


Simultaneously,  one "Y" the ovt. Company who loaned the above said machine had also paid the same amount to the same firm without the knowledge of "X"and this amount was also received by the firm.


In the mean time, on some source of information, the vigilance Department of the concerned Government had commenced vigialance inquiry.  When the inquiry was in progress, the firm had refunded the amount received from the "Y" Department, stating that this amount has been refunded since no such repair was carried out for the machine, and the "Y" company had also accepted the money back and satisfied.  No compaint was made by the company alleging that the  "X" had misused his official powers by settling the amount to the company.


But, the Vigilance had given the report, as if  "X" had misappropriated the amount of Rs.11,255/- belonging to the Govt. and registered an FIR under Section 13 (c) of the P.C. Act, 1988.


On the above case study, is there any misappropiration  and is there any prima-facie case registered by the Vigilance Police against "X" and the firm.


Please give expertise opinion


 


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register