Q.

01 Explain in detail white collar crime and distinguish white collar

crime from traditional crime. Discuss the means or device prevail to
restrict the white and blue collar crimes.

White-collar crime, as termed by Edwin Sutherland in 1939, refers to non-

violent, financially motivated offenses typically committed by individuals,
businesses, or government professionals in positions of trust and authority.
Distinguishing white-collar crime from traditional crime involves an
understanding of the nature of the offenses, the perpetrators, and the
means used to commit and restrict these crimes.
1. Nature of White-Collar Crime: White-collar crimes are characterized by
deceit, concealment, or violation of trust and are committed for financial
gain. Examples include embezzlement, fraud, insider trading, and
cybercrime. Traditional crimes, on the other hand, often involve physical
force, violence, or threat.
2. Perpetrators: White-collar criminals are usually individuals in positions
of authority or trust within organizations, such as executives, managers, or
professionals. Traditional crimes are often associated with individuals from
diverse socio-economic backgrounds, engaging in direct, often violent,
criminal activities.
3. Means of Committing White-Collar Crime: White-collar crimes
frequently involve sophisticated methods, such as computer hacking, Ponzi
schemes, and accounting fraud. Traditional crimes, by contrast, may
involve direct physical actions like robbery, assault, or burglary.
4. Means to Restrict White-Collar Crime:
a. Legislation and Regulation: Governments enact laws and
regulations to define and deter white-collar crimes. Regulatory bodies,
like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), play a crucial
role in overseeing financial markets and enforcing compliance.
b. Law Enforcement Agencies: Specialized units within law
enforcement agencies focus on investigating and prosecuting white-
collar crimes. These agencies employ financial experts, forensic
accountants, and cybercrime specialists to uncover and pursue
offenders.
 c. Corporate Governance and Compliance: Organizations implement
robust corporate governance structures and compliance measures to
ensure ethical behaviour and deter white-collar crimes. Internal
controls, audits, and whistle-blower programs contribute to early
detection.
d. Education and Training: Educational programs and training
initiatives increase awareness about white-collar crimes among
professionals and the general public. This includes educating
individuals about potential scams, phishing attacks, and fraudulent
schemes.
e. Technological Solutions: Advancements in technology are used to
develop tools and systems that can detect and prevent cybercrimes.
Encryption, firewalls, and secure authentication methods are
employed to safeguard sensitive information.
f. International Cooperation: Given the global nature of many white-
collar crimes, international cooperation and collaboration among law
enforcement agencies facilitate the tracking and prosecution of
offenders across borders.
g. Whistle-blower Protection: Whistle-blower protection laws
encourage individuals to report white-collar crimes without fear of
retaliation. This promotes a culture of transparency and aids in the
early detection of fraudulent activities.
In conclusion, white-collar crime differs from traditional crime in terms of
its nature, perpetrators, and means of commission. Combating white-collar
crime requires a multifaceted approach involving legislation, enforcement,
corporate governance, education, technology, and international cooperation
to create a comprehensive framework for prevention and prosecution.

Q.02 Explain in detail the types of Deviance by legislator and

bureaucrats and method of taking off with case laws and examples.

Deviance among legislators and bureaucrats involves actions that deviate

from accepted norms, ethics, or legal standards. Understanding the types of
deviance, methods of addressing them, and illustrative case laws and
examples provides insight into the complexities of maintaining integrity
within the legislative and bureaucratic domains.
1. Types of Deviance:
a. Corruption:
 Definition: Illicit use of power for personal gain, often involving bribery,
embezzlement, or kickbacks.
 Case Law: The "United States v. Skilling" case (2010) involved
corruption charges against Jeffrey Skilling, the former CEO of Enron.
b. Nepotism:
 Definition: Favouritism shown to relatives in appointments,
promotions, or contracts.
 Case Example: In 2019, the "Nepotism in Hiring Practices" scandal in a
government agency led to investigations and policy reforms.
c. Abuse of Power:
 Definition: Unauthorized use of authority for personal or political
purposes.
 Case Law: The "Watergate Scandal" (1972-1974) exemplifies abuse of
power by President Richard Nixon, leading to his resignation.
d. Fraud:
 Definition: Deceptive practices for financial gain, involving
misrepresentation of facts.
 Case Example: The "Satyam Scandal" (2009) in India involved
fraudulent financial reporting by the company's founder.
e. Conflict of Interest:
 Definition: Situations where personal interests conflict with
professional duties.
 Case Law: In the "Enforcement Directorate v. Moin Qureshi" case
(2019), conflict of interest charges were raised against a senior
bureaucrat.
2. Methods of Addressing Deviance:
a. Legal Measures:
 Strengthening anti-corruption laws, whistle-blower protection, and
introducing stringent penalties.
b. Institutional Reforms:
 Implementing transparent recruitment processes, performance
evaluations, and internal checks.
 c. Ethical Training:
 Providing ongoing training on ethical conduct and promoting a culture
of integrity.
d. Oversight Mechanisms:
 Establishing independent oversight bodies to monitor and investigate
allegations of deviance.
e. Technological Solutions:
 Implementing technology-driven tools for financial transparency and
tracking.
3. Case Laws and Examples:
a. United States v. Skilling (2010):
 Deviance: Corruption (Enron scandal).
 Outcome: Jeffrey Skilling convicted for fraud, insider trading, and
conspiracy.
b. Watergate Scandal (1972-1974):
 Deviance: Abuse of power (Richard Nixon).
 Outcome: Nixon resigned; several officials faced legal consequences.
c. Satyam Scandal (2009):
 Deviance: Fraudulent financial reporting.
 Outcome: Company founder Ramalinga Raju convicted for accounting
fraud.
d. Enforcement Directorate v. Moin Qureshi (2019):
 Deviance: Conflict of interest.
 Outcome: Ongoing legal proceedings; highlighting the need for
addressing conflicts of interest.
In conclusion, tackling deviance among legislators and bureaucrats involves
a combination of legal measures, institutional reforms, ethical training,
oversight mechanisms, and technological solutions. Case laws and
examples illustrate the real-world impact of these deviant behaviours and
the importance of robust measures to maintain integrity in legislative and
bureaucratic functions.
Q.03 Define public servant and offences and punishment. Discuss
relevant provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

1. Definition of Public Servant:

A public servant is an individual employed by the government or a public
authority to perform official duties. This includes individuals in various
capacities, such as government officers, officials, judges, police officers, and
employees of public sector enterprises. Public servants are expected to act
in the public interest and perform their duties with integrity and
impartiality.
2. Offences and Punishments:
Offences committed by public servants are often related to corruption,
abuse of power, and unethical conduct. The punishments for these offences
vary based on the severity of the misconduct. Common offences include
bribery, embezzlement, abuse of official position, and obtaining valuable
things without lawful consideration.
3. Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988:
The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, is a crucial piece of legislation in
India that addresses corruption-related offences committed by public
servants. The Act aims to combat corruption and holds public officials
accountable for their actions. Relevant provisions include:
a. Section 7 - Public Servant Taking Gratification Other Than
Legal Remuneration:
 Offence: Public servants taking gratification other than legal
remuneration for performing or abstaining from performing an official
act.
 Punishment: Imprisonment for a term not less than six months,
extendable to five years, and a fine.
b. Section 8 - Taking Gratification, in Order, by Corrupt or Illegal
Means, to Influence Public Servant:
 Offence: Individuals taking gratification with the intent to influence a
public servant.
 Punishment: Imprisonment for a term not less than six months,
extendable to five years, and a fine.
 c. Section 9 - Taking Gratification for Exercise of Personal
Influence with Public Servant:
 Offence: Public servants accepting gratification for exercising personal
influence over another public servant.
 Punishment: Imprisonment for a term not less than six months,
extendable to five years, and a fine.
d. Section 11 - Public Servant Obtaining Valuable Thing Without
Consideration From Person Concerned in Proceeding or Business
Transacted by Such Public Servant:
 Offence: Public servants obtaining valuable things without lawful
consideration from a person concerned in a proceeding or business
transacted by the public servant.
 Punishment: Imprisonment for a term not less than six months,
extendable to five years, and a fine.
e. Section 13 - Criminal Misconduct by a Public Servant:
 Offence: Public servants using their position for undue advantage or
obtaining valuable things for themselves or others.
 Punishment: Imprisonment for a term not less than one year,
extendable to seven years, and a fine.
f. Section 14 - Habitual Committing of Offence under Sections 8,
9, and 12:
 Offence: Public servants habitually committing offences under Sections
8, 9, or 12.
 Punishment: Enhanced imprisonment term.
These provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, are designed to
deter and penalize corrupt practices by public servants, ensuring
accountability and integrity in public service. The Act plays a crucial role in
addressing corruption-related offences and promoting ethical conduct
among individuals holding public office.
Write short note

01. Judicial trend in respect of Deviance in electoral process.

1. Introduction:
 The electoral process is the cornerstone of democratic governance, and
any deviance within it poses a threat to the democratic ideals. Judicial
trends play a pivotal role in shaping and upholding the integrity of the
electoral process by interpreting and applying relevant laws.
2. Judicial Scrutiny of Electoral Deviance:
 Over the years, the judiciary has actively engaged in scrutinizing
various forms of deviance within the electoral process, including
malpractices, corruption, and violations of ethical conduct
3. Legal Framework:
 The Representation of the People Act and other electoral laws provide
the legal foundation for addressing electoral deviance. Courts interpret
and apply these laws to ensure free and fair elections.
4. Voter Intimidation and Malpractices:
 Courts have consistently condemned and addressed instances of voter
intimidation, booth capturing, and other malpractices that undermine
the fairness of the electoral process.
5. Political Funding and Transparency:
 Judicial trends reveal a focus on ensuring transparency in political
funding. Courts have intervened to address issues related to
undisclosed funding sources and the influence of money in elections.
6. Disqualification of Candidates:
 The judiciary has played a crucial role in interpreting provisions
related to the disqualification of candidates involved in criminal
activities, corrupt practices, or other offenses that compromise the
sanctity of the electoral process.
7. Right to Information (RTI) in Electoral Process:
 Courts have expanded the application of the Right to Information in
the electoral context, ensuring citizens' access to crucial information
about candidates, political parties, and electoral processes.
8. Use of Technology:
 The judiciary has embraced the use of technology to enhance
transparency and efficiency in the electoral process. This includes
electronic voting machines (EVMs), voter verification, and result
tabulation.
9. Judicial Activism and Electoral Reforms:
 Judicial activism has been instrumental in pushing for electoral
reforms. The judiciary has provided directives and recommendations
to ensure that the electoral system evolves to meet contemporary
challenges.
10. Prevention of Electoral Fraud:
 Courts have played a significant role in addressing and preventing
electoral fraud. This includes cases related to impersonation, multiple
voting, and manipulation of electoral rolls.
11. Decriminalization of Politics:
 Judicial trends reflect a commitment to decriminalizing politics by
interpreting laws that disqualify individuals with criminal
backgrounds from contesting elections.
12. Citizen Participation and Election Litigation:
 The judiciary encourages citizen participation in the electoral process
through election petitions. Courts actively hear and decide cases
related to alleged electoral deviance, fostering a sense of
accountability.
13. International Perspectives:
 The judiciary often considers international best practices and legal
precedents in addressing electoral deviance, contributing to a global
effort to ensure democratic processes remain robust and transparent.
14. Conclusion:
 The judicial trend in addressing deviance in the electoral process
reflects a commitment to upholding the principles of democracy,
transparency, and fairness. Through consistent interpretation and
application of laws, the judiciary plays a crucial role in safeguarding
the integrity of elections, ensuring that citizens' voices are genuinely
represented.
02. Critically Explaining the Unconstitutionality of "Third Degree"
Methods and the Use of Fatal Force by Police with Case Laws:

1. Introduction:
 "Third degree" methods and the excessive use of fatal force by police
are controversial practices that raise serious constitutional concerns.
This critique revolves around the violation of fundamental rights,
including the right against self-incrimination, the right to life, and the
prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment.
2. Unconstitutionality of "Third Degree" Methods:
a. Violation of Article 20(3) - Right Against Self-Incrimination:
 "Third degree" methods involve coercive interrogation tactics that
violate an individual's right against self-incrimination. The
Constitution prohibits extracting confessions through force, making
such methods unconstitutional.
 Case Law: In Nandini Satpathy v. P.L. Dani (1978), the Supreme Court
held that extracting confessions through physical or mental torture is
a violation of Article 20(3).
b. Prohibition of Torture under Article 21:
 The right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 encompasses the
right to be free from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment.
"Third degree" methods violate this constitutional protection.
 Case Law: In D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997), the Supreme
Court emphasized that custodial violence, including torture during
interrogation, is a blatant violation of human dignity and
constitutional rights.
3. Unconstitutionality of Fatal Force by Police:
a. Violation of Right to Life under Article 21:
 The use of fatal force by police, especially in situations where non-
lethal alternatives are available, violates the right to life guaranteed
under Article 21.
 Case Law: In People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. State of
Maharashtra (2014), the Supreme Court emphasized that the use of
force should be proportionate and necessary to achieve a legitimate
aim, and excessive force leading to the loss of life is unconstitutional.
 b. Proportionality and Reasonableness Standard:
 The use of fatal force must adhere to the principles of proportionality
and reasonableness. Unjustified or excessive force violates these
constitutional standards.
 Case Law: In Prakash Kadam v. Ramprasad Vishwanath Gupta (2011),
the Supreme Court emphasized that police action leading to the use of
deadly force must be proportionate to the threat posed.
4. Constitutional Safeguards and Accountability:
a. National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) Guidelines:
 The NHRC has issued guidelines emphasizing the need for police to
adhere to constitutional norms and respect human rights during
investigations.
 Case Law: In Dilip K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997), the Supreme
Court endorsed the NHRC guidelines, emphasizing the importance of
accountability.
b. Supreme Court Directives:
 The Supreme Court has issued various directives to prevent custodial
violence and ensure accountability, emphasizing the need for
independent investigations and compensation for victims.
 Case Law: In R.D. Upadhyay v. State of A.P. (2006), the Supreme Court
directed the establishment of a Police Complaints Authority to inquire
into complaints against police misconduct.
5. Conclusion:
 The unconstitutionality of "third degree" methods and the use of fatal
force by police is rooted in the protection of fundamental rights.
Judicial pronouncements and case laws highlight the necessity to
ensure that law enforcement agencies adhere to constitutional norms,
safeguarding the dignity and rights of individuals even during police
investigations and encounters. The evolving jurisprudence emphasizes
the need for accountability, proportionality, and respect for human
rights in law enforcement practices.
03. Explain in details Gender based Aggression.
1. Introduction:
 Gender-based aggression refers to aggressive behaviours that are
directed at an individual or group based on their gender identity. This
form of aggression is deeply rooted in societal norms, power dynamics,
and stereotypes related to gender. It manifests in various contexts,
including interpersonal relationships, workplaces, and public spaces.
2. Forms of Gender-Based Aggression:
a. Physical Aggression:
 Involves physical harm or the threat of harm based on gender. This
can include domestic violence, assault, or other forms of physical
abuse.
b. Verbal Aggression:
 Encompasses the use of derogatory language, insults, or verbal threats
targeting an individual's gender. This may include sexist comments,
slurs, or harassment.
c. Sexual Aggression:
 Involves non-consensual sexual behaviours, including sexual
harassment, assault, or rape, rooted in power imbalances and gender
dynamics.
d. Psychological Aggression:
 Targets an individual's mental and emotional well-being, often through
manipulation, coercion, or control based on gender stereotypes.
e. Online Aggression (Cyberbullying):
 Utilizing digital platforms to engage in aggressive behaviours, such as
online harassment, revenge porn, or cyberbullying, with a focus on an
individual's gender.
3. Factors Contributing to Gender-Based Aggression:
a. Societal Norms and Stereotypes:
 Traditional gender norms and stereotypes contribute to aggression by
perpetuating expectations and beliefs about how individuals should
behave based on their gender.
 b. Power Imbalances:
 Gender-based aggression often stems from power imbalances, where
individuals use aggression as a means to maintain or reinforce their
perceived superiority.
c. Cultural and Structural Factors:
 Cultural practices and structural inequalities can contribute to the
normalization of gender-based aggression, creating an environment
where such behaviours are tolerated.
d. Lack of Education and Awareness:
 Insufficient education and awareness regarding gender equality and
respectful behaviour can contribute to the perpetuation of gender-
based aggression.
4. Impact on Victims:
a. Physical and Mental Health Consequences:
 Victims of gender-based aggression may experience physical injuries,
mental health issues such as anxiety and depression, and long-term
trauma.
b. Social Isolation:
 Individuals subjected to gender-based aggression may withdraw from
social interactions due to fear, shame, or the impact on their self-
esteem.
c. Career and Economic Consequences:
 Gender-based aggression can negatively impact victims' careers and
economic well-being, particularly in cases of workplace harassment or
discrimination.
5. Legal and Policy Frameworks:
a. Legal Protections:
 Many jurisdictions have laws against gender-based violence, providing
legal avenues for victims to seek justice and protection.
b. Workplace Policies:
 Organizations often implement anti-harassment and gender-sensitive
policies to address and prevent gender-based aggression in the
workplace.
6. Combating Gender-Based Aggression:
a. Education and Awareness Programs:
 Promoting gender sensitivity through educational programs and
awareness campaigns to challenge stereotypes and reshape societal
attitudes.
b. Empowering Victims:
 Providing support systems and resources to empower victims to report
incidents and seek help, fostering a culture of accountability.
c. Legal Reforms:
 Advocating for and enacting legal reforms that strengthen protections
against gender-based aggression and ensure swift and effective justice.
d. Promoting Gender Equality:
 Fostering environments that promote gender equality, challenging
traditional norms, and encouraging respectful and inclusive
behaviours.
7. Conclusion:
 Gender-based aggression is a complex issue deeply rooted in societal
structures and attitudes. Combating it requires a multi-faceted
approach involving legal measures, education, awareness, and a
commitment to fostering environments that respect and uphold the
dignity and rights of all individuals, regardless of their gender.

04. Explain in details the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption

Act to combat deviance with case laws.

1. Introduction:
 The Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA) is a crucial piece of legislation
in India aimed at preventing corruption among public servants and
individuals associated with public services. The Act provides
provisions to combat various forms of deviance, including bribery,
abuse of power, and corrupt practices.
2. Key Provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act:
a. Section 7 - Public Servant Taking Gratification Other Than
Legal Remuneration:
 Provision: Criminalizes public servants taking gratification (other than
legal remuneration) as a reward for performing or abstaining from
performing their official duties.
 Case Law: The case of State of Maharashtra v. Wasudeo Ramchandra
Sonawane (1963) highlighted the application of Section 7 in convicting
public servants for accepting illegal gratification.
b. Section 8 - Taking Gratification, in Order, by Corrupt or Illegal
Means, to Influence Public Servant:
 Provision: Addresses situations where individuals take gratification
with the intent to influence a public servant to exercise their influence
improperly.
 Case Law: In Satwant Singh Sawhney v. Ram Pratap Singh (1967), the
Supreme Court clarified the scope of Section 8, emphasizing the need
for a direct connection between the gratification and the public
servant's actions.
c. Section 9 - Taking Gratification for Exercise of Personal
Influence with Public Servant:
 Provision: Deals with situations where public servants accept
gratification for exercising personal influence over another public
servant.
 Case Law: The case of CBI v. R. K. Jain (1998) highlighted the
applicability of Section 9 in cases where a public servant is influenced
by gratification to favor someone.
d. Section 11 - Public Servant Obtaining Valuable Thing Without
Consideration From Person Concerned in Proceeding or Business
Transacted by Such Public Servant:
 Provision: Addresses situations where public servants obtain valuable
things without lawful consideration from individuals concerned in a
proceeding or business transacted by the public servant.
 Case Law: In Subedar Singh v. State of U.P. (1971), the Supreme Court
discussed the application of Section 11 in cases involving public
servants obtaining valuable things.
e. Section 13 - Criminal Misconduct by a Public Servant:
 Provision: Defines criminal misconduct, including abuse of position,
obtaining valuable things, and possession of disproportionate assets
by a public servant.
  Case Law: In P. Chidambaram v. CBI (2019), the Delhi High Court
emphasized the importance of mens rea (criminal intent) in
establishing criminal misconduct under Section 13.
f. Section 14 - Habitual Committing of Offence under Sections 8,
9, and 12:
 Provision: Addresses habitual offenders, enhancing punishment for
individuals repeatedly committing offenses under Sections 8, 9, or 12.
 Case Law: While there may not be specific case law on Section 14, it
plays a crucial role in ensuring enhanced penalties for repeat
offenders.
3. Amendments to the Prevention of Corruption Act (2018):
 The 2018 amendments introduced changes such as the
criminalization of bribery in the private sector and the introduction of
the concept of "undue advantage."
4. Challenges and Criticisms:
 Despite its provisions, the PCA has faced criticisms for being
insufficient in addressing systemic corruption. The challenges include
issues related to the definition of corruption and the burden of proof.
5. Conclusion:
 The Prevention of Corruption Act serves as a critical tool to combat
deviance, particularly corruption, among public servants. Through its
various provisions and case laws, the PCA seeks to establish a robust
framework for the prosecution of individuals engaging in corrupt
practices, contributing to the overall efforts to promote transparency
and accountability in public service.
Political corruption is a pervasive and detrimental phenomenon that
undermines the principles of democracy, erodes public trust, and hampers
socio-economic development. It involves the abuse of public power for
private gain, often manifested through bribery, embezzlement, nepotism,
cronyism, electoral fraud, and other illicit practices within the political
sphere.
05. Forms of Political Corruption:
1. Bribery and Kickbacks:
 Politicians accepting or offering monetary or non-monetary
favours in exchange for influence, decisions, or policy outcomes.
 2. Embezzlement:
 Diverting public funds or resources for personal gain, leading to a
depletion of public coffers.
3. Nepotism and Cronyism:
 Favouring family members or close associates in appointments,
contracts, or policymaking, bypassing merit-based
considerations.
4. Electoral Fraud:
 Manipulating electoral processes through voter intimidation,
rigging, or vote-buying to influence election outcomes.
5. Misuse of Public Resources:
 Utilizing public resources, such as government funds or facilities,
for personal or political purposes.
6. Extortion and Patronage:
 Exploiting political power to extract resources from individuals or
businesses, or establishing patronage networks to maintain
control.
Impact of Political Corruption:
1. Erosion of Public Trust:
 Widespread political corruption diminishes public confidence in
government institutions, leading to a breakdown in the social
contract between citizens and the state.
2. Inequality and Poverty:
 Resources diverted through corrupt practices often exacerbate
economic disparities, hindering equitable development and
perpetuating poverty.
3. Undermining Democratic Institutions:
 Corruption weakens the functioning of democratic institutions,
fostering a culture of impunity and compromising the rule of law.
4. Reduced Foreign Investment:
 Countries plagued by political corruption often face reduced
foreign direct investment due to concerns about the business
environment and transparency.

 5. Social Unrest:
 Perceived corruption can fuel social discontent and unrest as
citizens become disillusioned with the government's ability to
address their needs.
Remedies and Prevention:
1. Strengthening Anti-Corruption Laws:
 Implementing and enforcing robust anti-corruption legislation
with severe penalties can act as a deterrent.
2. Independent Anti-Corruption Agencies:
 Establishing and empowering independent anti-corruption bodies
to investigate and prosecute corrupt practices without political
interference.
3. Transparency and Accountability:
 Promoting transparency in government operations, public
procurement, and financial transactions enhances accountability
and reduces opportunities for corruption.
4. Whistle-blower Protection:
 Encouraging and protecting whistle-blowers who expose
corruption helps uncover illicit practices and safeguards those
willing to come forward.
5. Ethical Leadership and Political Will:
 Fostering a culture of ethical leadership and political will is
crucial for combating corruption from within the political
establishment.
6. Civil Society Engagement:
 Empowering civil society organizations and the media to actively
monitor and expose corrupt practices, acting as watchdogs for
accountability.
7. International Cooperation:
 Engaging in international collaboration to address cross-border
corruption, sharing information, and promoting collective efforts
to combat political corruption.
Conclusion:
Political corruption poses a significant threat to democratic governance,
economic development, and social cohesion. Efforts to eradicate political
corruption require a multi-pronged approach involving legal reforms,
institutional strengthening, and a collective commitment from citizens, civil
society, and political leaders. A sustained commitment to transparency,
accountability, and ethical governance is essential for building resilient
institutions and fostering a political environment that prioritizes the public
interest over personal gain.

06. Critically explain the concept of Plea of Superior Orders with

illustrations and case law.

The plea of superior orders, also known as the "Nuremberg Defense" or

"Command Responsibility," is a legal concept that arises when an individual
argues that they were merely following orders from a higher authority and
should not be held personally accountable for their actions. While this
defense has historical roots, particularly in military tribunals, its
application is subject to critical scrutiny, especially in the context of serious
crimes.
1. Legal Foundation:
 The plea of superior orders is grounded in the idea that individuals,
particularly those in subordinate positions within a hierarchical
structure, may be compelled to follow orders without the freedom to
question or disobey. However, various legal systems and international
law recognize limitations to this defense, particularly when it comes to
crimes against humanity, war crimes, and gross human rights
violations.
2. Illustrations:
a. Military Context:
 A soldier argues that they committed an act during wartime because
they were following orders from a superior officer, implying that they
had no choice but to obey.
b. Corporate Context:
 An employee claims to have engaged in fraudulent activities or
unethical practices because they were instructed to do so by their
superior, suggesting that they should not be held responsible for
actions taken under orders.
 c. Political Context:
 A government official justifies actions, including human rights abuses,
by asserting that they were carrying out orders from a higher-ranking
authority, indicating a lack of personal culpability.
3. Limitations and Criticisms:
a. Jus Cogens and International Law:
 The principles of customary international law, particularly jus cogens,
establish that certain crimes, such as genocide and crimes against
humanity, cannot be justified or excused by superior orders.
b. Nuremberg Principles:
 The Nuremberg Trials after World War II firmly rejected the defense of
superior orders, establishing the precedent that individuals can be
held criminally accountable for their actions, even if carried out under
orders.
c. Specific Criminal Intent:
 Many legal systems require proof that the accused had specific
criminal intent or knew of the wrongful nature of the act, irrespective
of superior orders, to hold them criminally liable.
d. Proportionality and Lawfulness:
 The defense is generally not applicable if the act committed is grossly
disproportionate to the order given or if the order itself is unlawful.
4. Case Law:
a. Nuremberg Trials (1945-1946):
 In the United States v. Karl Brandt et al., part of the Nuremberg Trials,
defendants claimed they were following orders in conducting medical
experiments on prisoners. The Tribunal rejected the defense,
emphasizing that individuals are responsible for crimes against
humanity, even if acting under orders.
b. My Lai Massacre (1968):
 In the aftermath of the My Lai Massacre during the Vietnam War,
Lieutenant William Calley claimed he was following orders. However,
he was convicted of murder, highlighting the limitations of the plea of
superior orders.
 c. International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia
(ICTY):
 In the Celebici Case (1998), the ICTY ruled that orders from a superior
could not justify torture or inhumane treatment, reinforcing the
principle that superior orders are not a blanket defense for serious
crimes.
5. Contemporary Application:
 The plea of superior orders continues to be considered in
contemporary legal proceedings, but its application is nuanced and
subject to rigorous examination, especially in cases involving
international crimes and human rights violations.
6. Conclusion:
 While the plea of superior orders recognizes the hierarchical nature of
certain structures, it is not an absolute defense. Legal systems,
especially international law, emphasize that individuals bear
responsibility for their actions, particularly in cases of grave offenses.
The limitations and criticisms surrounding this defense underscore
the importance of personal accountability and the rejection of unlawful
orders, even in situations of hierarchical authority.

07. Write a short note on Lokpal and Lokayukt (5 Marks).

Introduction: Lokpal and Lokayukt are statutory bodies established to

address issues of corruption and maladministration in the government.
They play a crucial role in promoting transparency, accountability, and
integrity within public administration.
Lokpal:
 Definition: Lokpal is an ombudsman institution at the central level in
India, responsible for investigating and addressing complaints of
corruption against public officials, including the Prime Minister and
Members of Parliament.
 Formation: The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, led to the
establishment of the Lokpal. It became operational in 2019.
 Composition: The Lokpal consists of a Chairperson and a maximum
of eight members, including judicial and non-judicial members.
  Jurisdiction: It covers all categories of public servants and
investigates cases of corruption and misconduct at the highest levels
of government.
Lokayukt:
 Definition: Lokayukt is the counterpart of Lokpal at the state level,
addressing corruption issues within individual states.
 Formation: States enact their Lokayukta Acts to establish Lokayukt
institutions. The structure and jurisdiction may vary across different
states.
 Composition: Like Lokpal, Lokayukt typically comprises a
Chairperson and members, including judicial and non-judicial
representatives.
 Jurisdiction: Lokayukt investigates and adjudicates cases of
corruption against public servants within the respective state's
jurisdiction.
Significance:
 Anti-Corruption Measures: Lokpal and Lokayukt serve as key
institutions to combat corruption within the government by
independently investigating allegations and recommending actions.
 Accountability: These bodies enhance accountability by providing a
mechanism for citizens to raise concerns about corruption and
maladministration.
 Promoting Transparency: The existence of Lokpal and Lokayukt
promotes transparency in governance, contributing to the overall
integrity of public administration.
Challenges:
 Delayed Implementation: The establishment and functioning of
Lokpal and Lokayukt have faced delays, impacting their effectiveness
in addressing corruption promptly.
 Limited Awareness: Many citizens may not be fully aware of the role
and functions of Lokpal and Lokayukt, limiting their potential impact.
 Resource Constraints: Adequate resources, both human and
financial, are essential for these bodies to function efficiently.
Resource constraints may affect their operational capabilities.
Conclusion: Lokpal and Lokayukt are instrumental in the fight against
corruption, providing institutional frameworks for investigating and
redressing grievances related to maladministration. While challenges
persist, their establishment signifies a commitment to fostering clean and
accountable governance in India.

08. Write a short note of Public account committee. (5 Mark).

Introduction: The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) is a parliamentary

committee in India that plays a pivotal role in overseeing the government's
financial matters, ensuring accountability and transparency in the use of
public funds.
Composition:
 Members: The PAC is typically composed of Members of Parliament
(MPs) from both the Lok Sabha (House of the People) and the Rajya
Sabha (Council of States).
 Chairperson: The committee is headed by a Chairperson who is
appointed by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha. The Chairperson is
traditionally from the opposition party.
Functions and Responsibilities:
1. Examine Public Expenditure: The primary function of the PAC is to
examine the government's expenditures as detailed in the
appropriation accounts and report to the Parliament.
2. Audit Reports: The PAC scrutinizes audit reports prepared by the
Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG), which highlight
instances of financial irregularities and inefficiencies in government
spending.
3. Accountability and Transparency: It ensures accountability and
transparency in the use of public funds by holding the executive
accountable for its financial decisions and actions.
4. Report to Parliament: The PAC submits its reports to the Parliament,
highlighting its findings and recommendations. These reports
contribute to parliamentary debates on financial matters.
5. Follow-up Actions: The committee monitors the implementation of its
recommendations and ensures that corrective actions are taken by the
government in response to identified irregularities.
Significance:
 Parliamentary Oversight: The PAC serves as a crucial mechanism for
parliamentary oversight over government finances, enhancing the
checks and balances within the democratic system.
 Ensuring Fiscal Discipline: By critically examining government
expenditures, the PAC promotes fiscal discipline and discourages
wasteful spending, contributing to sound financial management.
 Public Trust: The committee's work fosters public trust by ensuring
that public funds are utilized efficiently and in accordance with
established norms.
Challenges:
 Resource Constraints: Like many parliamentary committees, the PAC
may face resource constraints, affecting its ability to thoroughly
scrutinize all aspects of government spending.
 Timely Reports: Delays in the submission of reports and the
implementation of recommendations can impact the effectiveness of
the PAC in addressing financial irregularities promptly.
Conclusion: The Public Accounts Committee is an essential component of
India's parliamentary system, playing a crucial role in upholding financial
accountability, transparency, and prudent fiscal management. Its efforts
contribute to the larger goal of ensuring responsible and efficient use of
public funds for the benefit of the citizens.

09. Write a short note on Vigilance Commission at the Central and

State level. (5 Marks).

Introduction: Vigilance Commissions at both the Central and State levels

are specialized bodies in India tasked with promoting integrity,
transparency, and accountability in public administration. They play a
crucial role in preventing and addressing corruption within government
organizations.
Central Vigilance Commission (CVC):
 Formation: The Central Vigilance Commission was established in
1964 based on the recommendations of the Santhanam Committee. It
operates at the central level and is an apex integrity institution in
India.
  Functions:
1. Anti-Corruption Measures: The CVC is primarily responsible for
combating corruption within the central government by
investigating complaints of corruption and recommending
punitive measures.
2. Supervision and Advisory Role: It exercises superintendence
over the functioning of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)
in cases related to corruption. Additionally, it provides advice to
central government organizations on vigilance matters.
3. Preventive Vigilance: The CVC focuses on preventive vigilance
measures, promoting ethical conduct and integrity in public
administration to minimize the occurrence of corruption.
State Vigilance Commissions (SVCs):
 Formation: State Vigilance Commissions operate at the state level and
are established in accordance with the respective state legislations.
Each state has its own SVC.
 Functions:
1. Localized Anti-Corruption Measures: Similar to the CVC, SVCs
are responsible for preventing and combating corruption within
state government organizations.
2. Supervision and Advisory Role: They supervise the functioning
of state-level anti-corruption agencies and provide advisory
services to state government departments on vigilance matters.
3. Promoting Ethical Conduct: SVCs work towards fostering a
culture of integrity and ethical conduct within state government
institutions through preventive vigilance measures.
Significance:
 Corruption Prevention: Both the CVC and SVCs contribute
significantly to preventing corruption by investigating complaints,
recommending disciplinary actions, and advising on vigilance matters.
 Enhancing Transparency: The work of these commissions enhances
transparency in government functioning, promoting public trust and
confidence in the integrity of public officials.
 Accountability Measures: By holding public officials accountable for
corrupt practices, the commissions contribute to accountability within
the public administration.
Challenges:
 Resource Constraints: Limited resources, both human and financial,
may impact the effectiveness of these commissions in handling the
volume of complaints and conducting thorough investigations.
 Political Interference: Ensuring independence and autonomy is
crucial to their effectiveness, and any political interference can
undermine their ability to function impartially.

Conclusion: Vigilance Commissions at the Central and State levels are

essential institutions in India's anti-corruption framework. Their efforts
contribute to maintaining the highest standards of integrity within public
administration, reinforcing the principles of transparency, accountability,
and ethical conduct.