DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNVERSITY

SABBAVARAM, VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P., INDIA

PROJECT TITLE
The Role of CBI in investigating Anti- Corruption Cases under IPC and other
Legal provisions- with special reference to State of AP

SUBJECT
Criminal Law I

NAME OF THE FACULTY

Dr. Katari Srinivasa Rao Sir

Name of the Candidate: Mulla Zaheer Basha

Roll Number: 20LLB067
Semester: 3rd

Page | 1
 CERTIFICATE

I, Mulla Zaheer Basha hereby declare that this project titled “The Role of CBI in
investigating Anti- Corruption Cases under IPC and other Legal provisions- with special
reference to State of AP” submitted by me is an original work undertaken by me, I have duly
acknowledged all the sources and references from which ideas and extracts have been
sourced. This project is free from plagiarism and does not utilize any unfair means
whatsoever.

Mulla Zaheer Basha

Roll No. 20LLB067
Semester 3

Page | 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page | 3
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would sincerely like to put forward my heartfelt appreciation to our respected Criminal Law
- I professor, Dr. Katari Srinivasa Rao, for giving me a golden opportunity to select this
project topic: “The Role of CBI in investigating Anti- Corruption Cases under IPC and other
Legal provisions- with special reference to State of AP”. I have tried my best to collect
information about the project in various possible ways to depict a clear picture of the subject.

Page | 4
ABSTRACT

Page | 5
 INTRODUCTION

Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is an investigative agency formed by the Indian
government to investigate crime, particularly corruption, in Union Territories directly
administered by the Indian government. Over time, it has evolved into the country's primary
corruption-investigating agency. It enjoys a high level of confidence among Indians. As a
result, states are now referring sensitive and large-scale corruption investigations to the CIA
for examination. According to the Indian Constitution, the High Courts of various States, as
well as the Supreme Court of the country, have the authority to refer any crime investigation
to the Central Bureau of Investigation. State authorities look to the Central Bureau of
Investigation as an expert agency for help on subjects related to the investigation and
prosecution of corruption accusations. The amount of collaboration between the two agencies
is outstanding.

The Central Bureau of Investigating (CBI) is India's principal anti-corruption investigation

agency, controlled by the Prime Minister. The executive branch determines the career
prospects of Central Bureau of Investigation officials, and their services are transferable. As a
result, the executive branch and lawmakers oversee the Central Bureau of Investigation's day-
to-day work, either directly or indirectly. As a result, efforts to combat corruption against
ministers and lawmakers have been ineffective. Given these issues, it is proposed that the
Central Bureau of Investigation team be put under the jurisdiction of Lokpal or the Chief
Justice of India rather than the Prime Minister's office.

Page | 6
 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

During the early stages of World War II, the Government of India recognised that the large
increase in expenditure for war activities had created opportunities for unscrupulous and anti-
social individuals, both official and non-official, to engage in bribery and corruption. The
government formed the Special Police Establishment (SPE) under a DIG in the former
Departments of War by executive order in 1941, with the aim of investigating allegations of
bribery and corruption in transactions involving the War and Supply Departments. SPE's
activities were broadened in 1942 to include charges of railway corruption, as well as the
transit and delivery of war goods. The government passed an ordinance in 1943 that
established a special police force with the authority to investigate particular offences
committed by Central Government personnel. The directive, which expired on September 30,
1946, was replaced by the Delhi Special Police Establishment Ordinance of 1946, since the
need for a Central Government Agency to investigate bribery and corruption allegations
lasted long after the war ended. The Delhi Special Police Establishment Act (DS PE Act) was
passed the same year. Following the Act's passage, the SPE (Special Police Establishment)
was transferred to the Home Department, and its mandate was broadened to include all
branches of the Indian government. The SPE's authority was expanded to include all Union
territories, and the Act permitted for its extension to the states with the agreement of the state
governments. The headquarters of SPE were moved to Delhi, and the organisation was given
the title of Director, Intelligence Bureau. However, the Special Police Establishment (SPE)
was established in 1948 and placed under the direction of the Director, Intelligence Bureau.
The office of Inspector General of Police, SPE, was founded in 1948, and the organisation
was placed under the control of the Director, Inelegance Bureau. The Special Police
Establishment (SPE) was established in 1948 as a post of Inspector General of Police, and the
organisation was placed under his direction. In 1953, the Special Police Establishment (SPE)
added an Enforcement Wing to deal with Import and Export Control Act infractions. With the
passage of time, the Special Police Establishment was entrusted with an increasing number of
cases involving a variety of laws other than the Prevention of Corruption Act and violations
of the Import and Export Control Act (SPE.). By 1963, the Special Police Establishment
(SPE) had been given the ability to investigate infractions of 91 parts of the Indian Penal
Code, 16 additional Central Acts, and the 1947 Prevention of Corruption Act. There was a
growing need for the Central Government to have a Central Police Agency that could

Page | 7
investigate not only cases of bribery and corruption, but also major frauds involving
Government of India Departments, Public Joint Stock Companies, Passport frauds, crimes on
the High Seas, crimes on the Airlines, and serious crimes committed by organised gangs and
professional criminals. As a result, the Government of India established the Central Bureau of
Investigation by a Resolution dated April 1, 1963. (CBI). It was broken down into the
following sections:
(i) Investigation and Anti Corruption Division (Delhi Special Police Establishment).
(ii) Technical Division
(iii) Crime Records and Statistics Division
(iv) Research Division
(v) Legal and General Division
(vi) Administration Division

Legal Powers of Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is given legal jurisdiction to investigate under the
DSPE Act of 1946. In relation to the investigation of offences notified by the Central
Government under Section 3 of the Act and the arrest of persons involved in such offences,
this Act confers concurrent and co-intensive powers, duties, privileges, and liabilities on
members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)
with police officers of the union Territories. According to Section 2 of the Act, the DSPE has
exclusive jurisdiction to investigate infractions in the Union Territories. The Central
Government, on the other hand, can expand its jurisdiction to other areas, such as railway
areas and states, under Section 5(1) of the Act if a State Government consents under Section
6 of the Act. When it comes to investigations, executive officers of the Central Bureau of
Investigation (CBI) with the rank of Sub Inspector and above have all the powers of a station
officer-in-charge of the police station for the concerned region. According to Section 3 of the
Act, SPE is only authorised to investigate matters that the Central Government reports on a
regular basis. Over time, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has established itself as
the country's premier investigative agency, gaining the trust of the people, Parliament, the
judiciary, and the government. Over the previous 69 years, the institution has grown from an
anti-corruption organisation to a multidimensional, multi-disciplinary central police-law
enforcement body with the capability, credibility, and legal authority to investigate and
punish offences wherever in India. The Central Government has notified offences under

Page | 8
existing 73 Central Acts, 18 State Acts, and 239 offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC)
under Section 3 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment (DSPE) Act.1

Role and Function of Central Bureau of Investigation

India's premier investigative agency is the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). With
jurisdiction over all of India, he is tasked with six tasks, which are as follows:
1. Investigation and Anti-corruption Division
The Central Bureau of Investigation is legally obligated to investigate cases involving Central
Government organisations and their officials in which there is a breach or violation of central
law, such as FERA, Passport, cases under the Official Secrets Act, Railway, Post and
Telecom Departments, where cheating or fraud is committed. The Central Bureau of
Investigation is also authorised to investigate high-seas and airline crime, as well as other
organised crime that is detrimental to or threatens the Central Government, State
Governments, and Union Territories.

2. Function of Technical Division

The Technical Division assists with the investigation of accounts, income tax, excise duty,
and other permissible taxes.

3. Statistical Crime Record Division

Keeping a statistical database of all big inter-state crimes and researching the strategies
utilised in each.

4. Research Division
To investigate and analyse major crimes, make prevention advice, point out faults in existing
laws, and propose new techniques of investigation.

5. Legal Division
Provide legal guidance in investigation and prosecution cases, as well as judicial decision
analysis and training for Central Bureau of Investigation officers. Its main function is to
notify the investigation department of any gaps in the investigation.

1
Role of Special Investigating Agencies PDF

Page | 9
6. Administrative Division
Central Bureau of Investigation has following three administrative Divisions:
A) Anti-Corruption Division –
Cases of corruption, fraud committed by Public servant of Central Government its public
sector undertaking.
B) Economic Crime Division –
Cases related to bank, FERA, SEBI, Import and Export, antiques, smuggling, Hawal Tax
aviation and other economic offices having its impact of finance on central government.
C) Special Crime Division –
Terrorism, bombs, and other criminal offences are all punishable by the Indian Penal Code.
Granted the aforementioned structure, the Central Bureau of Investigation and the Anti-
Corruption Bureau must be legally strengthened and given more powers so that they can
operate independently and transparently.

Legal provisions and/or Laws to control corruption-

Public servants or politicians who are indulges or committed any offence related to money or
economy of India can be penalized for corruption under the following acts.
1. The Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Lord Macula and the British government enact the Indian Penal Code in the year 1860 to
ensure the smooth and proper running of the criminal court system. Prior to independence,
the Indian Penal Code was the primary instrument or tool used to combat or control
corruption in public life. Sections 161 to 165A of the Public Officers Act lay the groundwork
for prosecuting corrupt public officials.

The Indian Penal Code of 1860 is India's primary tool for policing and administering criminal
justice. In its prior section 161-165 A, which codifies extensive anti-corruption rules. The
Indian Penal Code's prohibitions are insufficient to stem the stream of corruption in society.
According to the Indian Penal Code, "corrupt public workers" who violate suitable laws,
processes, defective paperwork, or misuse their position or judgement may face punishment.
Public workers in India can be tried for corruption under the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act of 1972 made significant changes to anti-corruption
legislation. The punishment under Indian Penal Code Section 165 was enhanced from two to
three years. The IPC was amended in 1952, and a new section 165 A dealing with assisting

Page | 10
and abetting was introduced. According to the legislation, all corruption-related offences
should be tried by special judges.

Provisions under Indian Penal Code:-

In 1860, the British Government of India enacted anti-corruption legislation in the Indian
Penal Code (Sections 161-171). These clauses make it illegal for a public official to accept
anything (in cash or in kind) other than his or her legitimate salary for performing or failing
to perform any act. The Indian Parliament then passed the Prevention of Corruption Acts.
First in 1947, and then again in 1988, the anti-corruption statute was tightened by making it
more precise and stringent. The new Act establishes a minimum required sentence and
increases the punishment (imprisonment) from three to five years. Despite a strict legal
regime, corruption is on the rise in India, and there is little evidence that the new rules and
machinery put in place to combat it are having any effect. Corruption was better regulated
when the provisions of the Indian Penal Code were the only regulations for prohibiting it than
it is now, when we have a specialised and stricter statute.

When we look at the reasons for the quick spread of corruption, we can see that the
regulations of the Indian Penal Code were sufficient to keep it under control until they were
granted licence to do so. Corruption was kept under control when corrupt officials and
government employees understood that if they committed corrupt acts, the law would punish
them brutally and there would be no defence.

In 1952, Section 165-A of the Indian Penal Code was adopted, making abetting corruption a
specific offence and providing corrupt officials with a tool to file a complaint of a corrupt
conduct with the abetment of it and have him penalised by misusing government machinery.
Even if a person is obliged to pay a bribe to an official in order for his or her task to be
completed, he or she will not submit a complaint for fear of being charged with aiding and
abetting a crime. Our government is more concerned with the prevention of corruption than
the English government, in the guise of preventing the misuse of anti-corruption laws from
making a complaint against a public person due to the fear of being charged with abetment of
corruption. This has given current corrupt government officials carte blanche to engage in
illegal conduct without fear of punishment, contributing to the country's rising corruption
problem.

Page | 11
2. Criminal Procedure Code:-
During the Second World War, money was tight. This led in widespread corruption in public
life, which remained even after the war. To counteract the situation, the Prevention of
Corruption Act of 1947 was enacted. The following authorities are granted to investigating
agencies by the Criminal Procedure Code of 1973, as well as Mutual Legal Assistance
Treaties (MLAT) in Criminal Matters and Extradition Treaties:

Sections 166A and 166B of the Criminal Procedure Code authorise India's crime
investigation agencies to make requests to other countries, as well as accept requests from
other countries, for assistance in the investigation of crimes committed in their respective
countries. The most popular sort of request letter is a rotatory letter. The execution of such
Rotatory letters is based on Mutual Legal Assistance and Extradition Treaties inked by India
with other countries. India now has criminal mutual legal assistance treaties with 20 countries
and extradition accords with 25. Mutual legal assistance accords almost often include a
provision on asset recovery and the sharing of that information with other countries. On the
basis of reciprocity assurances, international cooperation is sought.

3. The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.

To counteract corruption, the Prevention of Corruption Act of 1947 was enacted. It's been
altered twice. 1. The Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1952. 2. The Anti-Corruption
(Amendment) Act of 1964 This was based on the idea in the Santhanam committee report.
The Bribery and Corruption Prevention Act aims to improve the effectiveness of anti-bribery
and anti-corruption legislation. According to the Santhanam Committee, "improper or selfish
exercise of power and influence related to public office or the specific position one has in
public life."
This committee has identified certain procedural causes of corruption
1. Red tape and administrative delay.
2. Unnecessary regulations.
3. Scope of personal discretion.
4. Lack of transparency.

Today, eradicating corruption from Indian society is a monumental task. Due to the paucity
of money created by the Second World War, significant corruption in public life occurred and

Page | 12
remained even after the war. To deal with the crisis, In 1947, the Act to Prevent Corruption
was enacted.

The Indian Penal Code's definition of a public servant was included into the Prevention of
Corruption Act of 1947, and "criminal misconduct in the exercise of official responsibilities
by a public servant" is classed as a new offence punishable by a minimum of one year and a
maximum of seven years. In certain circumstances, this statute allows the burden of proof to
be shifted to the accused.

When a public servant receives gratification, it is considered that the pleasure was accepted
as a motive or reward u/s 161, 164, and 165 without the authorisation of the authority
competent to remove the charge. The Prevention of Corruption Act is a special statute
designed to consolidate and strengthen the law relating to the prevention of corruption and
related matters. In view of the law established by the United States Supreme Court in a
landmark ruling.

The Indian Penal Code, enacted in 1860, is a collection of regulations that govern criminal
behaviour in India. There was a section on public officials' corruption and corrupt practises.
The provisions of Chapter IX of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, dealing with public servant
corruption have been revised, and the penalties for violating the law have been increased.

Later, in 1947, the Prevention of Corruption Act was enacted to address the issue of
government corruption. Changes were made from time to time to keep up with the changing
times. It was repealed in 1988 in favour of a more comprehensive and broad piece of law, the
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, which was enacted.

4. The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The Prevention of Corruption Act of 1988 is the primary source of anti-corruption law. This
is not the ultimate law, however, because it does not sufficiently tackle corruption. In
addition, there is no regulation in place to address corruption in the private sector or among
people. As a result, the private sector is more corrupt than the government. The Prevention of

Page | 13
Corruption Act of 1988 is the most recent primary anti-corruption legislation. In the 39th year
of India's republic, the parliament passed this law with the purpose of eliminating corruption
in the public sector. The act is divided into thirty-one sections and is divided into five
chapters. This law became effective on September 9, 1988, and was published in the Indian
Gazette on September 12, 1988. Except for Jammu & Kashmir, it applies to the entire
country. The Prevention of Corruption Act of 1988 was enacted to eliminate corruption in
society. This law's principal purpose is to make it illegal for public employees to accept or
solicit illegal gratification while doing their duties. We have long observed unethical
behaviour on the part of individuals, cooperative societies, trusts, and financial associations
engaged in any financial transaction or corrupt criminal misbehaviour, but our current
legislation is silent on the matter. Even the private or commercial sector is eager to pay
whatever it takes to have projects finished in their favour. In India, there is currently no
comprehensive regulation in place to tackle corruption in the private sector. The Prevention
of Corruption Act of 1988 was enacted to consolidate and strengthen key anti-corruption
provisions from other pieces of legislation. Penalties for offences already forbidden by law
were raised for public employees. The current law had features such as freezing suspected
property while an investigation is underway, among other things. The Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1988 is India's primary statute for dealing with corruption-related offences,
but it does not cover all paths of corruption. This act consolidates the provisions of the
Prevention of Corruption Act of 1947, the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1952, and
sections 161 to 165 A of the Indian Penal Code of 1860.

The main Act, the Prevention of Corruption Act of 1988, contains specific provisions that
supersede generic provisions. As a result, the provisions of this act take precedence over the
requirements of the Cr.P.C. in general. The Prevention of Corruption Act of 1988 was passed
in order to consolidate anti-corruption provisions from other pieces of law in order to
improve their effectiveness. For example, the Prevention of Corruption Act of 1988 enlarged
the term of "public servant," increased the punishment for past offences, and provided
provisions for freezing suspected property while the case was being heard. The Act mandated
a day-to-day trial, prohibited the granting of a stay of proceedings, and included other
restrictions.

Page | 14
Other laws and enactments to control Corruption
1. The Import and Export Control Act, 1947
Several Acts and policies have been implemented in India to standardise export and import
trade practises. Among these are the Imports and Exports (Control) Act of 1947, the Foreign
Trade (Development and Regulation) Act of 1992, and the Import-Export (EXIM) Policy
1997-2002. The Imports and Exports (Control) Act of 1947 was abolished and replaced by
the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act of 1992 to provide the central
government more control over exports and imports.

2. The Essential Commodities Act, 1955

The Indian Parliament passed the Essential Commodities Act to ensure the delivery of
particular commodities or goods whose supply, if disrupted due to hoarding or black-
marketing, would have a significant impact on people's everyday life. This comprises, among
other things, food, pharmaceuticals, and fuel (petroleum commodities).

3. The Companies Act, 1956

The Companies Act 1956 is a 1956 Act of the Indian Parliament that allows businesses to be
formed by registration and establishes the duties of companies, directors, and secretaries. The
Companies Act 1956 is administered by the Government of India through the Ministry of
Corporate Affairs and offices such as the Registrar of Companies, Official Liquidators,
Public Trustee, Company Law Board, Director of Inspection, and others. The Registrar of
Companies (ROC) is responsible for new business creation as well as ongoing company
management.
Since its introduction, it has been changed multiple times, with the most significant changes
being in 1988, 1990, 1996, 2000, and 2011.

4. The Income Tax Act, 1961.

As stated in Part IV of the Indian Constitution (i.e., Directive Principles of State Policy),
direct tax legislation is one of the most significant ways for the state to accomplish both
social and economic justice while also defraying the expense of delivering public services
and maintaining economic order. The emphasis is rapidly shifting toward voluntary
compliance with tax legislation; nevertheless, this would be a pointless exercise unless it is

Page | 15
complemented with a strong deterrence against tax evaders, ensuring that they do not go
unpunished.
There are three models built in the fiscal legislation for encouraging tax compliance:
a) Charge of interest
b) Imposition of Penalty
c) Launching of prosecution against tax delinquents
While charging of interest is compensatory on character, the imposition of penalty and
institution of prosecution proceedings act as strong deterrence against potential tax
delinquents. Chapter XVII and XXI of Income Tax Act, 1961 contain various provisions
empowering an income tax authority to levy penalty in case of certain defaults.

5. The Customs Act, 1962

Governments require money to carry out their numerous duties, and the Central Board of
Direct Taxes and the Central Board of Excise and Customs are its revenue watchdogs. Tax
evasion and avoidance, as well as the accumulation of black money, are as old as the
mountains themselves. The problem's size and complexity have expanded significantly.
According to Kausalya's advise, taxes should be collected as smoothly as a bee sipping honey
from a flower. A similar piece of advice may be found in the KachhitSarga of Valmiki's
Ramayana. The goal of the state should be to carry out its operations in this manner, without
causing inconvenience or harassment in the process of enforcing the law. Similarly, the
Constitution decrees.
The pursuit of perfection is an endless one. It would be a wonderful goal if additional funds
could be raised by reorganising the central Board of Excise and Customs while
simultaneously preventing evasion and avoidance.

6. The Gold Control Act, 1968

The Indian Parliament passed the Gold (Control) Act in 1968 to govern the sale and holding
of gold in personal possession. However, due to a lack of domestic production, India's strong
demand for gold is met by gold imports, leading the rupee to fall dramatically and foreign
exchange reserves to drain to dangerous levels. The depreciation of the Indian rupee is
creating a dramatic increase in food commodity prices due to the greater cost of petroleum
product imports. Given these circumstances, India's gold import policy aims to restrict gold
imports at a fair level by imposing taxes and legal limits on a regular basis.

Page | 16
7. The Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA)
The Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) was adopted by Indira Gandhi's government
in the Indian Parliament in 1973 and went into effect on January 1, 1974. FERA's strict
requirements applied to certain forms of payments, foreign exchange and securities
exchanges, and operations that had an indirect impact on foreign exchange and currency
import and export. The measure's goal is to control payments and foreign exchange.
8. The Benami Transaction (Prohibition) Act, 1988.
The Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act of 1988 is an Indian Parliament Act that prohibits
Benami transactions as well as the ability to recover Benami property. It went into effect on
September 5, 1988. A Benami transaction is defined as any transaction in which property is
transferred to one person in exchange for payment from another.
The majority of India's wealth is invested in Benami real estate, gold and jewellery, high-
value consumer goods, and other displays of luxury.

9. The Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999.

Middlemen or touts who collect significant commissions for brokering deals involving
purchases from foreign suppliers typically transfer such monies in foreign currencies under
the guise of being the proceeds of some international enterprise. This Act empowers the
Directorate of Enforcement, India, to investigate and prosecute such individuals.

10. The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

Money laundering is the process of moving dishonest or illegally obtained funds in order for
them to look to have come from a legitimate source. Money laundering fuels corruption in the
country.

The concept "money laundering" intrigues me. "As the name implies, any property acquired
or obtained as a result of criminal behaviour is always "Black Money or Dirty Money."
Money that is not the legal property of the owner is referred to as "blackmoney." Through
this illegal activity, black money is used in transactions or washed away to be converted into
clean money.

Page | 17
Money laundering is the process of moving dishonest or illegally obtained funds in order for
them to look to have come from a legitimate source. Money laundering is most frequently
associated with white-collar crime. In today's society, money laundering has become a major
source of corruption.

Anti-Money Laundering Prevention in India The PMLA is a penal law that went into force on
July 1, 2005. Money laundering in connection with the predicate scheduled offences is
penalised under the scope of the Act. Under PMLA, there are 156 Scheduled Offenses, which
are divided into 28 distinct acts.
Section 3 of the PMLA defines money laundering.
The Directorate of Enforcement and the Financial Intelligence Unit, both of which are
government of India agencies, are authorised by this act to investigate and prosecute such
individuals.

Many public officials are able to conceal their illicit riches in foreign countries, which they
then send back to their home country through money laundering, disguised as funds from a
supposedly legitimate source. This Act empowers the Directorate of Enforcement, India, and
the Financial Intelligence Unit, India, both Indian government agencies, to investigate and
prosecute such individuals.

The Money Laundering Act, 2002, was enacted to eliminate or combat corruption by
empowering the Directorate of Enforcement India and the Financial Intelligence Unit to
investigate and prosecute public servants who held wealth in foreign countries and transferred
it to their homeland via money laundering.

11. The Right to Information Act, 2005

By permitting the public to probe government officials' activities and expose wrongdoing, the
Right to Information Act of 2005 provided anti-corruption advocates with some fangs.
The 2005 Right to Information Act is a significant component of anti-corruption legislation.
Simply enacting anti-corruption legislation will not sufficient. A powerful agency must be
established to efficiently enforce anti-corruption laws and combat corruption in public life in
order for anti-corruption legislation and agencies to be implemented successfully. The Right
to Information Act of 2005 was enacted to improve government efficiency, openness, and

Page | 18
accountability. The passing of the Right to Information Act in 2005 marked a watershed point
in the fight against government corruption.

Laws are generally enacted to keep citizens in control and to keep them from committing
crimes. The Right to Information Act, on the other hand, was enacted to empower citizens to
hold government and government workers accountable, to improve transparency in
government administrative actions, and to avoid corruption. The concept of information, as
defined under the Right to Information Act of 2005, is derived from the fundamental rights
enshrined in India's Constitution. 23 This Act went into force on October 12, 2005, and it
applies to the entire country of India with the exception of Jammu and Kashmir.

An Indian citizen can acquire any information held by the government, as well as certified
copies of government documents and records. Aside from that, he can view and copy
government records in person. Excessive secrecy in government management is well known
to increase corruption. The purpose of the Freedom of Information Act is to make
government more efficient, transparent, and responsible. This Act requires all public
agencies, with the exception of those tasked with national security duties, to regularly
disclose all information about their operations through various modes of communication,
including the Internet. Anyone can now seek any information from a government agency
simply by submitting a nearly free application. The public authority has 30 days to respond to
the application. If the applicant's request for information is denied, he or she has the right
under this Act to appeal to the appellate authorities. Without a doubt, this is a watershed
moment in the fight against public corruption.

12. The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013

On January 16, 2014, the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, went into effect. Lokpal is an
observer of the activities of Ministers and Members of Parliament. The Lokpal, as an
independent organisation, serves as an ombudsman to examine cases of corruption involving
public bodies. At its establishment, the Lokpal (anti-corruption watchdog) would have police
powers. It will have the authority to file FIRs, conduct criminal investigations, and bring
charges.

Page | 19
Lokayuktas do not have the authority to penalise anyone; they may only issue
recommendations, which are rarely implemented. Such agencies, which are supposed to act
as watchdogs against misbehaviour by prominent public officials, should be given
constitutional protection.

Shri.Anna Hazare, a social activist, fasted to death in order to introduce the 'Jan Lokpal Bill,'
which operates on the same principles as an ombudsman, but the Jan Lokpal will have far
more power and flexibility to combat corruption. Jan Lokpal, which means "people's
representative," will be the Lokpal's name. As a result of Anna Hazare's popular pressure, the
work of the drafting committee on the Jan Lokpal Bill would commence. The Administrative
Reform Commission proposed the Jan Lokpal Bill in 1967, and it is the basis for this bill.

The Jan Lokpal Bill includes three key provisions:

a. The Jan Lokpal, like the Election Commission, would be an autonomous body. Judges,
prominent civil society representatives, constitutional authorities, and politicians will be
appointed in an open and democratic process. As a result, the government has little influence
over how its operations are carried out.

b. It will be in charge of the CBI's anti-corruption division, which will be self-contained and
independent of the government. In reality, it is proposed that the CVC and departmental
vigilance be subordinated to Lokpal so that all corruption complaints can be processed by a
single institution. As a result, legislators, MPs, and ministers will be powerless to influence
the investigation or protect the guilty. Lokpal would have complete authority and the
necessary resources to investigate and prosecute any officer, judge, or politician on his or her
own.

c. The investigation and trial must be finished within a certain time frame. In any case, the
inquiry must be completed within six months and the trial must take place within a year. As a
result, within a year, the corrupt official or politician will be imprisoned.

Page | 20
13. The Whistle Blower Protection Act, 2014
On May 9, 2014, the Whistleblowers Protection Act of 2011 entered into force.
Whistleblowers perform a key and significant part in keeping government corruption-free.
Whistleblowing is an effective approach for avoiding illegal or corrupt behaviour within a
government organisation or institution. The whistleblower provides information on the
institution's corrupt practises and helps the anti-corruption procedure. As a result,
whistleblowers must be protected and treated with dignity when they expose instances of
government corruption or abuse of power.

The passage of a "Whistleblower Act" is one of the anti-corruption measures implemented in

a number of Western countries. The purpose of this legislation is to increase accountability in
government and public sector organisations by encouraging citizens to report malpractices in
these organisations to a competent authority so that legal action can be taken against them.
Corruption, scams, and scandals are always committed with the assistance of another person.
When corruption or corrupt acts occur, someone, whether known or unknown, in the same
organisation is bound to know about it. A whistleblower is someone who speaks up about
wrongdoing in an organisation or group of people for the public good.

The major purpose of the Whistleblower Protection Act of 2014 is to keep whistleblowers
from being dismissed or victimised. These people are known as "whistleblowers" because
they openly denounce corrupt practises for the benefit of society. Whistleblower protection is
another critical issue that must be addressed by government legislation. Due to the grave
danger to their lives, the Whistleblower Protection Act of 2014 was just enacted to protect
these whistleblowers. This statute, however, is insufficient and must be modified.

China has established a 24-hour hotline through which residents can denounce corrupt
officials.

O. The Electricity Supply Act, 2003

The act addresses critical issues of power generation, distribution, transmission, and trade.
While some of the measures have already been enacted and are yielding benefits, others have
yet to be completely implemented.

Page | 21
Previously, the Indian Electrical Act of 1910 and the Electricity (Supply) Act of 1948
governed the Indian electricity sector. Individual states' State Electricity Boards were
primarily in charge of generation, distribution, and transmission. Cross-subsidies have
reached an unsustainable level as a result of the current political and economic situation. In
1998, the Electricity Regulatory Commissions Act was enacted to decouple state
governments from tariff determination. The Electrical Act of 2003 was enacted to modernise
the electrical sector further through private sector participation and competition.

To update some of the country's earlier regulations, India enacted the Electricity Act 2003,
which went into force on June 2, 2003. The new act consolidates existing legislation and aims
to establish measures that encourage the development of the country's electricity industry.
The act attempted to address some of the issues that had stymied the country's reform
process, and as a result, it has given the power industry renewed hope.

An act to consolidate the laws governing electricity generation, transmission, distribution,

trading, and use in order to take measures to promote the development of the electricity
industry, promote competition, protect consumers' interests, and ensure the supply of
electricity in all areas, rationalise electricity tariffs, ensure transparent subsidy policies,
promote efficient and environmentally friendly policies, and establish the Central Electricity
Authority.

In a number of landmark rulings, the Supreme Court has stated that the vagueness of the
Electricity Law creates opportunities for corruption.

P. The Food Safety Act, 1990

The United Kingdom's Parliament passed the Food Safety Act in 1990. It is the legal
responsibility of the owner to treat food intended for human consumption in a controlled and
monitored way. The major requirements of the Act are that food fulfil food safety standards,
be "of the nature, composition, and quality desired," and be properly described and labelled.
This Act clarifies or deletes extraneous information that is of ambiguous or uncertain value or
relation to the subject matter of the article. Any notice, circular, label, wrapping, invoice, or
other document or presentation, as well as any broadcast or public announcement by visual or
acoustic presentation or both, is an advertisement, and the phrase "to advertise" shall be

Page | 22
construed accordingly; The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare is responsible for
ensuring consumer safety, and the "Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954" was enacted
with this in mind. This act's purpose was to offer consumers with pure and wholesome food
while also avoiding fraud and deception. The Act was amended three times, in 1964, 1976,
and 1986, with the purpose of reducing loopholes, stiffening penalties, and empowering
consumers and non-profit organisations to be more active in its implementation.

Q. The Prevention of Food Adulteration Act 1954

The topic of preventing food adulteration is included in the concurrent list of constitution
topics. The State Government, on the other hand, is in charge of general Act enforcement.
Aside from carrying out the statutory functions/tasks assigned to it under the various
provisions of the Act, the Central Government primarily acts as an advisor in its
implementation.

Throughout the country, regulation governing food quality has been in effect since 1899.
Until 1954, several states had their own food rules. However, there was a lot of diversity in
food regulations and specifications, which made inter-provincial trading difficult. The Central
Advisory Board and the Food Adulteration Committee were established by the Government
of India in 1943 to assess the problem of food adulteration and provide suggestions for
Central Legislation. The government is on the concurrent list for adopting legislation on
matters such as food and medicine adulteration. As a result, the Indian government passed the
Prevention of Food Adulteration (PFA) Act in 1954, which went into force on June 15, 1955.
All food adulteration laws in place in the state at the time were repealed by the Act.

A three-tier approach for ensuring food quality and safety is widely used in India. They truly
are.
* Government of India
* State Government
* Local Bodies
The Food Adulteration Prevention Act is a piece of federal legislation. The Act establishes
universal rules and standards that apply across the country. Aside from establishing rules and
standards. The best example of this Act is the case of Maggi Noodles.

Page | 23
R. Information Technology Act, 2000 (Amended 2009)
In today's world, electronic administration is a widely accepted tool for administration and
good governance. This style was also widely adopted on a global scale. People's
communication and social interactions have changed dramatically as a result of information
and communication technologies.

Information and communication technologies (ICT) and e-governance are being used to
facilitate online service delivery. The Information Technology Act of 2000 ensures that
government operations are transparent. The current Act makes a considerable effort to avoid
corruption by giving legislative validity to E-records, Digital signatures, and the Electronic
Gazette.

S. Citizen Charters.
Citizen Charters are a new concept that aims to improve the quality of public services. It
ensures that diverse government institutions provide services that are accountable,
transparent, and of high quality. It enables citizens to obtain services with minimal effort, in
an acceptable amount of time, and at a low cost. Citizens Charters will go a long way toward
combating corruption if they are implemented properly. In all government agencies, the
Indian government has undertaken an ambitious initiative for the formation and execution of
Citizens Charters.

The Central and State Governments have used a variety of techniques to ensure smooth and
efficient administration, with the Citizen Charter being the most effective. This instrument or
technique ensures that the administrative process runs smoothly, increases efficiency, and
reduces corruption and delays. Every public authority or government department must
publish a citizen's charter outlining all of the services it provides, as well as a grievance
resolution procedure for non-compliance with the Citizen's Charter.

The notion of citizen charters was established to improve the quality of public services by
ensuring accountability, transparency, and the quality of services offered by various
government entities. It allows citizens to obtain services with minimal effort and in an
acceptable amount of time. Corruption will be controlled if citizen charters are implemented
effectively.2
2
Constitution and Legal Provisions to Control Corruption PDF

Page | 24
Case Laws
A.B.Bhaskara Rao vs Inspector Of Police,Cbi
In this case, A.B.Bhaskara Rao, the appellant-accused was working as a Head Clerk
in the Traffic Cadre Section in the Office of the Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, South
Central Railway, Vijayawada during the period from April, 1992 to November, 1997. The
nature of duties of the appellant-accused included dealing with and processing of the
matters like promotions, transfers, seniority list, roster list, pay fixation on promotions,
retirements, resignations etc. of the personnel.

One K. Rama Rao-the Complainant, who was examined as PW-1, was posted as Yard
Points Man, Grade `A' under Station Superintendent, South Central Railway, Tanuku
from December, 1995 to June, 1997. In June, 1997, due to excess staff at Tanuku, he was
instructed to report at Head Quarters, Vijayawada and accordingly, when he reported
there, he was asked to go back to Tanuku. Thereafter, he went back to Tanuku from
where he was subsequently transferred to Rajahmundry. Thereafter, PW-1 made a
representation to his senior officer requesting him for posting at Vijayawada, Cheerala,
Vetapalam or Tenali. Later, PW-1 was transferred to Vijayawada.

As the appellant-accused was dealing with the transfers, the complainant (PW-1) met him
on 05.11.1997 at his office to pursue about the issuance of the said transfer order. The
appellant-accused asked him to come on 10.11.1997. When he met him on 10.11.1997,
the appellant asked him to come on the next day as he was busy in pay-fixation work. On
11.11.1997, again he went to the office of the appellant but he could not find him on his
seat. Again a day after i.e. on 13.11.1997, when he met the appellant-accused, he
informed him that his request for transfer has been processed and the order is ready and
the same has been placed before the A.P.O.

for signature and asked him to come on the next day, i.e., on 14.11.1997, and demanded
Rs.200/- for releasing the said office order.

(d) On the same day, (PW-1) reported the matter in writing to the Inspector of Police,
Central Bureau of Investigation (in short `the CBI), Vijayawada. On 14.11.1997, a trap
was laid by the CBI officials along with panchas and when the accused 

Page | 25
 demanded and accepted a sum of Rs.200/- as illegal gratification, he was caught red
handed along with the money which was recovered from the right hand side pocket of
his pant.

(e) On 15.11.1997, at 7.30 a.m., an FIR was registered by the Inspector, CBI,
Visakhapatnam Branch in Crime No. RC 20(A)/97-VSP. After recording the statements
of the witnesses, Inspector of Police, CBI, Visakhapatnam filed charge sheet being No.
2/98-YTR dated 29.04.1998 against the appellant-accused for an offence punishable
under Sections 7, 13(1)(d)(ii) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption
Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") in the Court of Special Judge for CBI
Cases at Visakhapatnam.

The Special Judge, CBI, by order dated 19.03.2001, convicted the appellant and
sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay
a fine of Rs.500/- and, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month for the
offence punishable under Section 7 of the Act and one year rigorous imprisonment with
a fine of Rs.500/- and, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for 

Page | 26
one month for the offence punishable under Sections 13(1)(d)

State Of Andhra Pradesh vs C. Uma Maheswara Rao & Anr on 31 March, 2004

Dr. G.S.R. Somayaji vs State Through Cbi on 27 September, 2001

Smt. K.Mythili Rani vs The State Of A.P., Thru Cbi, ... on 9 November, 2018
G.V.S. Lingam vs State Of A.P. on 2 November, 1998

The facts leading to this appeal may be stated briefly as follows : The appellant, accused
has joined Food Corporation of India as a Quality Control Assistant and later was
promoted as Assistant Manager and was working as Deputy Manager on the relevant
date. Being an employee of Food Corporation of India he was a public servant within the
meaning of Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code. On 27-8-1987 searches were conducted
in the house of the accused at Visakhapatnam. Various assets and properties were seized
during the course of search, which included five items of primary gold weighing 32273
grams which was also said to be in contravention of Gold Control Act. A sum of
Rs.1,80,600/- in cash and pronotes worth and G.V.V. Rajeswara Rao in favour of the
accused were also seized. Several bank fixed deposit receipts and bank pass-books
showing deposits of huge amounts were also seized.

The primary gold was seized by the Central Excise Authorities at the request of CBI and
other articles were seized by the CBI. Income tax file which is at Ex.P6 was also seized
under mahazar report Ex.P 1 dated 27-8-1987. PW37 the Inspector of Police, CBI,
Visakhapatnam registered acase in RCNo.28/ 87 on 24-8-1987 under Section 5(1)(e) read
with Section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act. Under the orders of the concerned
Superintendent of Police Ex.P99 first information report was issued. During the course of
investigation PW37 obtained three search warrants for searching the house and office of
the accused and the house of P. Sambamurthy who was managing the landed properties of
the accused. Search of the house of the accused was conducted on 27-8-1987 in the
presence of mediators K. Ravindra Kumar and Permanand. Search list and entry under
Ex.P 100 was prepared. Under search warrant one Mr. Gupta DSP conducted search of
the office premises of the accused at Patna. The articles found therein were seized under
search list and inventory Ex.P101 and the third search warrant was entrusted to one T.N.
Rao who conducted the search of the house of PW22 and the search list and inventory
was prepared under Ex.P102. The case against the accused is that he acquired and
possessed assets and resources disproportionate to his known sources of income. For this
purpose check period was taken as between 1-1-1 9771 to 27-1987 which is the date of
search. During the course of investigation of the case it was found that at the
commencement of the check period the accused had savings of Rs. 21, 929-53Ps. which
includes his wife's Stridhana property in the form of cash. At about the same time the
accused had acquired properties in family partition. The gold and silver articles said to
have been obtained by the accused in the partition were shown in the wealth tax returns
filed by him. In respect of the pronotes for Rs. 1,00,000/- seized during search, the
Investigating Agency accepted the explanation of the accused that they were obtained by
his father in respect of loans his father had advanced though the pronotes were taken in

Page | 27
the name of the accused. These pronotes were thus excluded from the assets of the
accused.

3. Investigation and scrutiny revealed that the accused earned a total income of
Rs.9,32,691 -13 ps. from his all known sources during the check period as detailed in
Annexure-A. The accused is said to have incurred expenditure of Rs.2,52,937-52 ps.
during the check period for the maintenance of himself and his family members
consisting of his wife Smt. G. V. Geetha and his son G.V.L. Raju and daughter Kum. G.
Sonia Gandhi as detailed in Annexure-B.

4. The accused was found in possession of both movable and immovable assets valued at
Rs.16,32,402- 33 ps. as on the date of the search which includes the assets held by him at
the commencement of the check period to the tune of Rs. 21,929-53 ps. Thius it was
ascertained that the likely savings of the accused during the check period would be
around Rs.6,79,753-61 ps. from out of the total income mentioned in Annexure-A. These
savings are shown in Annexure-C.

5. Thus the accused, according to the prosecution was found in possession of total assets
and pecuniary resources to the tune of Rs. 16, 10, 472-80 ps. as against the sources
available to him and his family members to the tune of Rs. 9, 30, 719-19 ps. which are
said to be disproportionate to his known sources of income for which the accused could
not satisfactorily account, inspite of an opportunity having been given to him in this
regard. It is thus charged that the accused committed offence punishable under Section
5(1)(e) read with Section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. Sanction for
prosecution of the accused has been given under Section 6(1)(c) of Prevent ion
of Corruption Act, 1947 by the Managing Director of Food Corporation of India, New
Delhi who is the competent authority to remove the accused from service.

6. On behalf of the prosecution PWs. 1 to 38 have been examined and Exs.Pl to P1 86

have been marked. On behalf of the accused DWs. 1 to 4 have been examined and Exs.Dl
to D19 have been marked.

7. On this evidence the learned Special Judge found that the prosecution has established
beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had assets and pecuniary resources which were
disproportionate to his known sources of income and accordingly convicted him for the
offence under Section 5(l)(e) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act,
1947 and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment and to pay fine as stated above.

M. Narsinga Rao vs State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 27 October, 2018

Page | 28