Conduct rules

• Conduct Rules lay down clear principles as to what the Government

expects from its employees.
• Conduct rules apply to both official AND personal life of the
government servant.
• If an official violates conduct rules, he may face warning/disciplinary
action/departmental proceedings. They are very different from regular Criminal
court proceedings. How?

Difference: Court vs Departmental Proceedings

Court proceedings / Criminal trial

Departmental proceedings / inquiry/Misconduct

Judge hears both sides

Inquiry officer hears both sides.

Judge gives punishment.

• Inquiry officer doesn’t give punishment. He merely sends his findings

to the disciplinary authority (e.g. Secretary of the department)
• Then disciplinary authority decides punishment against the employee.
• Article 20: Protection against Double Jeopardy applies.
• No person can be prosecuted-punished for same offense twice.
Double jeopardy doesn’t apply. e.g
• court case is going on- yet department can start its own
proceedings/inquiry.
• court acquits the accused employee- yet department can continue its
proceedings/inquiry.
• Officer files bogus bill to get LTC/Travelling allowance. Department
finds him guilty- orders him to repay from salary, matter is considered
over. (Punishment #1). But Five years hence, department refuses to give him
promotion citing earlier misconduct. (punishment #2)
• Principles of natural Justice apply in every case.
• Every accused is given the opportunity to defend himself- even in the
cases of national security (e.g. Kasab, Afzal Guru)
• Art.311: central-service/state-service/all India service member cannot
be dismissed/removed/reduced in rank, except after an inquiry with reasonable
 opportunity to defend himself.
• BUT this doesn’t always apply.
• For example President can remove an All India service officer, in the
interest of national security -without holding any inquiry, without giving
reasonable opportunity to defend himself, cross-examine witnesses etc.

We’ll see more about Art. 311 in separate article later.

• Jurisdiction is territorial in nature.

• e.g. Hunting bear/deer is legal in certain states of USA. Indian citizen
goes there, hunts wild animals. Indian court can’t punish, when he comes back.
• same for smoking marijuana in Netherlands and shooting
pornography in California.
• Department can still take action for “conduct unbecoming of a
government employee”.
• e.g. Indian officer is sent abroad for training and involves in those
type of activities.
Judge cannot hear the matter if he himself is a witness / complainant in that crime.
• Doesn’t apply to minor cases.
• e.g. Boss himself witnesses that employee has come late in the
office/did not wear uniform/ was sleeping on job etc. He can cut salary.
• guilty person gets jail/fine/both
guilty employee gets
• Major penalty: dismiss, remove, rank reduction, compulsory
retirement.
• Minor Penalty: censure, withholding promotion/ increment,
recovering loss.

by the way warning, displeasure, suspension=doesn’t count as punishment. We’ll see

more about types of penalties in later article.

• Police/Sarkaari Vakil will have to prove the case beyond all

reasonable doubts that accused person indeed committed the crime.
• ‘Burden of Proof’ in establishing a case lies on the prosecution.
• Benefit of doubt goes to the accused.
• Not necessary to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubts.
• If inquiry officer finds there is good chance that employee did the
mischief=> can declare him guilty.
 • Decision is taken based on preponderance of probability.
• Evidence Act applies
• Criminal Procedure code applies
• Doesn’t apply. Inquiry Officer can even rely on evidences that are not
admissible in courts. Examples in following points:
Hear-say evidence is not admissible e.g. Witness claims “someone told me that Accused
person had affair with that dead woman.”
Hear-say evidence may be accepted in a departmental inquiry provided it has
reasonable nexus and credibility.
Sting operations may be admissible subject to certain criteria, such as the court being
satisfied about the authenticity of the evidence and the identity of the persons depicted.
Inquiry officer may accept Sting operation as evidence without such caveats. He may
even hold the government servant guilty- even if there is reasonable doubt e.g. video is
not showing his clear face.
Tape recorded conversations are admissible in court. But there has to be strong
corroborative evidences, otherwise termed as weak evidences.
Tape-recorded evidence can be freely admitted without such caveats.
Document cannot be accepted as ‘evidence’ IF the person who wrote the document, is
not available for cross-examination.
Can be accepted, even if document maker is not available for cross-examination.
Evidence of accomplice needs corroboration.
Evidence of accomplice may be accepted without corroboration.
Circumstantial evidences enough for conviction- but must complete the chain of
events.
Can be accepted without completing chain of events.
Conduct rules: Examples

• Conduct rules differ from service to service. example All India services
have their own conduct rules, central services have their own rules and state
services have their own rules.
• Here goes the list of some conduct rules (not-exhaustive), that should
help you write the case studies related answer in a right direction.

I’ve classified them in four types: conduct rules affecting your

• office life
• public life
• financial life
• personal life

#1: Conduct Rules4 Office Life

Respecting the hierarchy

 • Should apply his best judgment- except when acting under the
direction of his superior officer. He shall obtain such direction in writing. If
impracticable to get written order on spot, then get the written order as soon
thereafter as possible.
• Should not evade the responsibility by asking written instruction of
superior, where it is not necessary in the scheme of work distribution. (see the
first case study at bottom)
• Must not bring outside influence upon any superior authority for
transfer, posting, promotion etc.
• Ensure his subordinates show integrity and devotion to duty.
• For office matters, he must not directly approach court/tribunals for
grievance redressal before exhausting remedies in the departmental hierarchy.
(i.e. Complaining to his boss=>his boss=>his boss…..if none of them helps, then
approach court/tribunal.)

Work related

• Must not engage a private person to perform his official duties. (see
case study at bottom)
• Unauthorized absence from duty=misconduct. (see case study at
bottom)
• Cannot do social / charitable service during office hours. (see case
study at bottom)
• Must finish his assignments within time and quality limits.
• Must not to adopt dilatory tactics or wilfully cause delays in official
work.
• Needs to show respect, courtesy, cooperation to everyone.

Sexual harassment

Must not discriminate agains working woman. Must not indulge in sexual harassment-
including

• physical contact and advances

• a demand or request for sexual favours
• sexually coloured remarks
• showing pornography
• any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual
nature
 Strike

• Must not join any employee union/ labour union without government
permission.
• Must not threaten to go on strike to meet his demand / demand of any
other Government servant
• hunger strike, refusal to accept salary, non-cooperation with superior
officer and other ‘satyagraha’ type activities also forbidden.

Generic

• maintain absolute integrity

• maintain devotion to duty
• Avoid conduct unbecoming of a Government servant. It is not possible
to have an exhaustive list of actions which would be unbecoming of a
Government servant- but overall, any conduct that goes against the general
norms of morality, decency, decorum and propriety = conduct unbecoming of a
government servant.

Misconduct in previous job

• Action can be taken against a Government servant in respect of

misconduct committed by him in his previous employment- IF it has rational
connection with his present job that renders him unfit and unsuitable.
• e.g. Person working as accountant. but later court declared him guilty
of forgery in an old case related to his previous job.=> present department can
take action. (And double jeopardy doesn’t apply).

#2: Conduct Rules4 Public Life

Public honor

• Without government permission, he must not accept any honor,

ceremony, meeting, rally held in his honor (or in honor of another employee).
• Farewell party during retirement/transfer=permitted.
• Simple and inexpensive entertainments arranged by public bodies or
institutions=permitted.

Vindication of official acts

Suppose public/press has made some remarks against him for his official conduct. He
cannot file defamation suit against them or make press statements, without
government permission.

Freedom of Speech
 • Shall not divulge information he got during his official capacity-to a
third party- except under good faith or when required by the law / departmental
rules.
• shall guard the official secrets. (Except where RTI applies.)
• Shall not make any public utterance that would embarrass relations
between
• union vs state
• state vs state
• India vs foreign country
• executive/judi./legislature
• Criticizing any policy of union / state government.
• Needs government permission before publishing book / writing in
newspaper / appearing on TV – radio EXCEPT literary, artistic or scientific
character.
• He shall not do above things even anonymously or pseudonymously.

Politics

• must not take part in politics

• must not give election fund/ assistance to any political party
• Can vote. But must not tell his preference to other people.
• Must not display any election symbols on his person, vehicle or home.
• Must not participate in rally, dharna-pradarshan, and demonstration
without government permission.

#3: Conduct rules4 Financial Life

@Office

• Must show diligence and probity in spending public money.

• Cannot demand funds from anyone without government permission-
even for good / charitable cause. (see the case study at bottom)

Sharemarket

• Must not make speculative investment in share market. Frequent

purchase or sale of bonds/equity=counts as speculation. Because
speculative=risky=can make him indebted. and indebted employee= more likely
to accept bribes.
• Must not buy shares/bonds from people he has official dealings with.
 because this opens pandora’s box for bribe transfer. e.g contractor sells his shares
worth 1 lakh (at current market rate) to engineer at a throwaway price of just
Rs.10000.
• An occasional investment in Mutual funds/ ULIP etc. permitted. But
has to notify government about such ‘movable’ assets.

Private trade

• Must not take any Private trade or employment without government

permission.
• Must not accept any fees from any public / private authority without
government permission. (e.g. can write scientific article in magazine without
government permission but IF magazine editor gives him money for the article=>
must get government’s permission before taking that money).
• Must not involve in management of any cooperative society, bank,
and company without government permission.
• If he is an officer bearer in any Co-operative Societies, Institutions,
clubs, gym etc. –must maintain its finances with full integrity.
• Must not promote his family members’ insurance/commission
agency.

Loans related

• Must not lend money to any person at interest rate.

• Must not borrow/lend money to any person he has official dealings
with. (same for his family members)
• Can borrow/lend money to a friend/relative – but only small amount,
temporary period, interest free.
• Must avoid Insolvency and habitual indebtedness.

Property related

Must furnish details about movable or immovable property bought/sold by him or his
family. (including purchase, sale, renting, leasing, mortgage, gift.)

employee rank

furnish asset details to

class 3, class 4

head of the office

class 2, class 1
head of the department.

• must not rent/lease his government quarter (house) to a third party

• must avoid habitual indebtedness or insolvency
• Must not make any investment/renting/leasing that is likely to
embarrass or influence him in the discharge of his official duties. (same for his
family member)

#4: Conduct Rules4 Personal life

family=any person bound to him by blood / marriage, and wholly dependent on him.

Marriage/family

• Bigamy prohibited. Even if bigamy permitted under his religion’s

personal law- he needs to get government permission.
• Must not give dowry, take dowry or demand dowry.
• Must not neglect his parents, wife and children.
• Must not employ child labor
• Observe age limit in marriage. Must not marry off his underage
children, must not attend such ceremonies of other relatives.
• Must not involve in adultery, moral turpitude etc. Moral turpitude is
not limited to sex and unnatural relationship. It implies depravity and
wickedness of character – anything that could shock the moral conscience of
society in general.
• protect environment, wild life and cultural heritage and other
fundamental duties;

Public life of family members

• Shall not use his position or influence to get job for his family member
in a public/private office.
• needs government permission before his son / daughter to gets job in
any private undertaking that has official dealings with government
• make all attempts to deter his family member from joining any
organization that is involved in subversive/ criminal activities.
• must inform his departmental authority, if he is working with/under a
government servant who happens to be his relative.

Gifts

• Must not accept gifts, free transport, boarding, lodging, lavish

 hospitality or frequent hospitality etc. from anyone he has official dealings with.
• Must not allow his family member/ middlemen to accept ^such
gifts/hospitality either.
• A casual/occasional meal, lift or other social hospitality = doesn’t
count as gift.
• Can accept gifts during weddings, anniversaries or religious functions.
As long as they’re within reasonable limits and social norms.
• Must declare expensive gifts received by him / his family member.

Arrest and detention

• If arrested, he must inform the details to his superiors.

• If spends more than 48 hours in police custody=automatically
deemded suspended.

and ofcourse Desi Liquor

• Avoid consumption of intoxicating drinks and drugs- even in areas

where it is legally permitted.
• Must not come to duty while under influence of liquor/drugs.
• Must not appear drunk in public places – even during off-duty hours.

anyways, enough of conduct rules, let’s check some case studies:

Cases studies

Seeking written order where unnecessary

• (Suppose) an SDM is allowed to clear NGO project grants worth upto

Rs.5 lakh on his own discretion. SDM Prem Chopra cleared a file in good faith,
but NGO had played some mischief. Yet, Department held Prem guilty and
transferred him to a non-focal punishment post. New SDM DevAnand gets the
charge. Another NGO comes up with new project file. ‘Cautious’ DevAnand
forwards the application to DM Pran and seeks his ‘written’ instructions.

hint: Yes, Evading responsibility- seeking ‘written’ instructions of superior, where it is

unnecessary in the scheme of work distribution. Same thing is happening post 2G,
CWG and Coalgate. Officers dont take decision on any project, keep forwardning files
upward. Projects are stalled, affects HDI, GDP, Foreign investment.

Disobeying written order

• Honest employee GuruDutt is suspended by his corrupt Head of

Department Prem Chopra. Prem also sends written instruction to Accounts
 officer DevAnand to stop Guru’s salary with immediate effect and pay him
subsistence allowance only. Guru is filing writ petition and expects that court will
give him favorable verdict within a week. Dev decides to delay on Prem’s
instruction and sanctions full salary to GuruDutt.

hint: Yes, Suspended employee is not entitled to full salary- he gets subsistence
allowance only. Therefore Prem’s written order is valid, irrespective of how corrupt
Prem Chopra himself is. Dev must not apply his ‘best judgment’ in such situation. Dev’s
decision of giving full salary to suspended employee= insubordination and causing loss
to public exchequer.

Hiring private citizen for public duty

• Collector DevAnand is overburdened with work related to land

records and RTIs. He has requested the revenue department to give him an
additional clerk but department refused citing budgetary constraints. Vivek
Mushraan is a fresh graduate preparing for UPSC exam from his home. He offers
to help part-time, for just 1500 per month. Dev hires him and gives salary from
his own pocket.

hint: Dev must not engage a private citizen to perform official duties. Because such
private citizen is not bound by the conduct rules, he can play mischief and bring
disrepute to DevAnand’s office.

Unauthorized absence #1

• Dev recently cleared UPSC exam and got allotted to Revenue service.
In his first posting itself, He is shocked by the level of corruption in the
department. His juniors and superiors are stonewalling all of his attempt to
provide honest administration. Dev is frustrated, decides to re-appear in UPSC
exam again to become an IAS/IPS/IFS hoping he’ll have more freedom there. He
stops reporting on duty. Boss Prem Chopra is happy that ‘headache’ employee is
gone- continues sanctioning DevAnand’s full salary, takes no action on Dev’s
unauthorized absence from duty.

hint: Unauthorized absence from duty = misconduct. Both are guilty of wasting public
money.

Unauthorized absence #2

• Young DCP DevAnand leads a team to another state, to arrest a mafia

don involved in ransom cases in his city. But for the fear of information leakage,
he doesn’t inform his superiors or the local police. During the raid don escapes,
there is gun-battle in a public place causing lot of panic and fear among local
public. Commissioner Pran reprimands DevAnand in front of his staff for this
#epicfail, calling him idiot/incompetent etc. Dev feels emotionally hurt and
becomes Devdas, stops reporting on duty and goes to USA to spend time with his
cousin. Pran does not take any action thinking “hotshots like DevAnand are not
 suitable for police work but it is difficult to remove an All India service officer
because of the protections under article 311. so it’s good he is gone by himself, I’ll
just ignore him.”

hint: Unauthorized absence from duty = misconduct. Both are guilty of wasting public
money.

Satyagraha

• Same case like earlier. DCP DevAnand failed to arrest the Don despite
all good faith. Commissioner Pran reprimands DevAnand in front of his staff for
this #Epicfail. Dev feels emotionally hurt, goes on a hunger strike demanding
apology from the commissioner.

hint: using hunger strike to compel superior officer to do xyz thing=misconduct. It

doesn’t matter how ‘noble’ DevAnand’s act was. Because Taking cue from him, other
employees might also resort to similar hunger strike/ satyagraha in futre.= breaks the
office discipline.

Social service during duty hours

• Honest police officer DevAnand is given ‘punishment’ posting in a

training academy. He has hardly any work to do, except taking salute from cadets
in morning parade and occasional signature on files. So, every day he leaves the
office after lunch recess, to teach poor kids in the local slum area. His juniors
don’t complaint and superiors don’t care, and so Dev continues his social service.

hint: cannot do social work during office hours. It doesn’t matter how noble Dev’s act
is. Because taking cue from him, even other lazy employees may also run away after
lunch, in pretext of doing social service. Thus, in the long run, this will break entire
work discipline in the office.

Seeking charity for ‘good’ cause

• RTO officer DevAnand has to sign hundreds of applications related to

driving license and vehicle registration everyday. Clerk Prem Chopra keeps a box
on his own table and tell every visitor: “This box is for Uttarakhand disaster
victims. If you donate any amount- I’ll keep your file on top when I bring the
bunch to Dev-saab for signature, thus your file will be cleared quickly.” Dev
knows about this but chooses to ignore because Prem genuinely sends entire
donation to the disaster victims.

hint: cannot demand funds/charity like this- even for good cause. Both guilty. It
doesn’t matter how noble and honest Prem is. But taking cue from him, other employee
might also start doing same- for personal use (e.g. need money for son’s cancer
operation) and DevAnand will have hard time preventing them-will cause resentment
among staff, will break team spirit.
 Just because computer is not working

• Collector DevAnand has installed a new e-governance project in his

district. All complaints are registered through computer, they can track progress
through SMS /email alerts etc. But recently, Computer has stopped working in
Tehsildar Prem Chopra’s office. Department has not yet sanctioned funds to get it
repaired/replaced. A Poor villager comes with a petition how local patwari is not
giving him land record copy. Prem refuses to accept complaint citing
dysfunctional computer and orders the villager to goto district office where the
computer ‘must be working’.

hint: Nothing prevents Prem Chopra from making a manual receipt of complaint. This
is dilatory tactic/work evasion. Public offices have functioned even before the invention
of computers and internet. Conduct unbecoming of a government servant.

Misc. cases

• PWD engineer DevAnand’s wife wants to setup a beauty parlor. Local

Contractor Prem Chopra says “I’ve an empty shop, and I’ll rent it to you at market
rates. Don’t worry, I’m renting in good faith, won’t demand any favors from your
husband later on.”

hint: Dev should not allow her wife to make any investment/renting/leasing that is
likely to embarrass or influence him in the discharge of his official duties. Irrespective
of what Prem Chopra promises.

• Subinspector Prem Chopra keeps big posters of Gods-Goddesses

behind his desk. One day DCP DevAnand notices this, callsup Prem in his office
and orders him to remove those posters. Within ten minutes, local MLA calls up
Dev saying “you should reconsider your order, because it might hurt feelings of a
particular community.”

hint: Yes, Prem brought ‘outside’ influence/pressure on his superior officer =

misconduct.

• Young steno Helen comes to office wearing t-shirt and jeans. Boss
DevAnand orders her to go back home and report in Saree/Salwar only. Helen
directly goes to high court and files writ petition.

hint: Directly going to court for grievance redressal without exhausting remedies in
departmental hierarchy= misconduct. (i.e. Helen should first complaint to Dev’s Boss
about the office dress code.)

• After death of Government employee Prem Chopra. His wife

Shashikala and mistress Bindu both have applied for pension rights. Over a
dinner-gossip, Pension dept. officer DevAnand narrates this episode to his college
buddy Pran.
hint: Divulging information that he got in official capacity to a third party-just for
gossiping, in absence of Good faith/ court order=not right.

• DevAnand is the warden of police academy near A’bad. Every

Saturday he visit A’bad to buy rations from shopkeeper Prem Chopra for the
hostel. Dev also brings his kid for watching cinema/zoo etc. Every time Prem
Chopra gives some toy, comics, ice-cream, cola to the kid.

hint: Dev should avoid this type of frequent hospitality from a person he has official
dealings with.

In the next article, we’ll see various types of enquries and case studies related to them.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Complaints: sources, types, actions, case studies
Prologue

• In the previous article we checked conduct rules: meaning, examples,

case studies
• moving to the next topic: Complaints: sources and types

Sources of Complaint

An officer comes to know about any misconduct/ mischief of his subordinates via
complaint. Here are the major sources of complaint:

• Direct complaint to Administrative authority (i.e.

public/NGO/MP/MLA anyone- making complaint to the officer or his boss)
• Direct complaint to Vigilance Commission, Lokayukta, Police, CBI,
ACB.
• Visit, inspection, raid, audit, surprise check, stock-verification (by the
officer or some other officer)
• Scrutiny of annual property statements, Income tax returns of his
subordinates
• Press/Media reports. And nowadays- even social networking sites.
• PIL, Writ petitions in the court
• Reports of legislative Committees like the Estimates / Public
Accounts, Committee on Public Undertakings. Debates on the floor of parliament
/ state legislature.

From Anonymous/ pseudonymous

anonymous

contains no name / address

pseudonymous

Contains name and address but no person exists on that given address.

CVC has issued following directive:

• Anonymous/pseudonymous complaints have become a convenient

loophole for blackmailing public officials. They’re are denied promotions/career
benefits while investigation is pending.=breaks the staff morale.
• Therefore CVC has instructed all Departments, PSUs and nationalized
banks not to take action on anonymous/pseudonymous complaints.
• However, if they want to look into any verifiable facts alleged in such
complaints, they should refer the matter to Vigilance Commission.

From Whistleblowers

At the moment, Whistleblower bill is pending Rajya Sabha. but

• Government of India has already authorized the Central Vigilance

Commission (CVC) as the ‘Designated Agency’ to receive written complaints from
whistleblowers.
• limitation: protection only for the Central Government / PSUs /
bodies owned by Central government

if the employee wishes to unearth scam in his department without disclosing his own
identity, he should

• Send complaint a closed/secured envelope.

• To Central Vigilance Commission
• Envelop must mention “Complaint under The Public Interest
Disclosure”.
• He must his name and address in the beginning or end of complaint.
(because CVC will not entertain anonymous/ pseudonymous complaints)
• The details of the complaint should be specific and verifiable.

If CVC receives such letter, it’ll be treated as whistleblower. CVC will order the inquiry
against department/PSU- without disclosing identity of the whistleblower.

Oral Complaints
 • While normally a public servant should to address all the instruction,
communications, order through proper official channel and writing.
• However, there is no objection in entertaining a direct oral complaint
about corruption or other kinds of malpractice.
• All the genuine complainants should be given protection against
harassment or victimization.
• Whenever a public/staff member furnishes any information orally in
confidence, the confidence should be respected.

From Civil Society

• Administrative authorities should welcome the cooperation from

NGOs, civil society, press and public to combat corruption and irregularities.
• But should not make distinction between one organization/person
from another. (e.g. Anna Hazzare makes complaint then officer quickly takes
follow up action but when some less known activist/NGO comes, officer takes the
matter casually.)
• NGOs or private citizens should not be authorized to receive
complaints on behalf of administrative authorities. (because they’re not covered
under conduct rules. may use this privilege for blackmailing others employees.)
• Whenever a public organization furnishes any information in
confidence, the confidence should be respected.

From Media Reports

• Responsible newspapers do not usually publish wild allegations

against individuals.
• Therefore, Prompt action is necessary to deal with such reports to
instill confidence in the public.
• The editors and reporters of the more responsible newspapers may
receive information about corruption through their numerous contacts, and
should be able to help fight corruption.
• Administrative authorities should welcome their help and should deal
with any information given to them in an appropriate manner.
• Although How far a particular reporter /NGO is trustworthy = a
matter of judgment depending on a number of factors =difficult to lay down a
general rule but Administrative authority should not put blind trust on anyone.

At the same time, an Administrative authority cannot shy away from responsibility just
because nobody made a specific complaint for example:

• Newspaper interviews a noted environmentalist, who talks about

 declining population of sparrows in the state and apathy of forest department.
Chief Conservator of Forest (CCF) chooses to ignore thinking, “nobody made
specific complaint to my office, besides these jholachhap NGO cum
environmentalist always blame everything on our forest department.”
• Local MLA makes a statement in the assembly about how city is
becoming unsafe place for working women, there is traffic congestion and
nuisance of real estate mafias and so on. Police Commissioner chooses to ignore
thinking, “these opposition MLAs always keep repeating the same tape in
assembly. All is well in my city.”

Classifying the complaints

• So far, we’ve learned about various source of complaints.

• Suppose DevAnand is head of the office. (Revenue, police, forest, post,
education, social welfare, irrigation ….whatever.) And He finds the name of his
Office / subordinate / staff member in any such complaint/information. What
should he do?
• first –make sure it is not anonymous/pseudonymous complaint. Then
Dev should further classify it according to the angle:

#1: Vigilance Angle

Vigilance hierarchy

Just a brief overview

@Union

@State

• CVC=>CBI
• They look after vigilance/corruption matters in all ministries,
departments, PSUs, Nationalized banks, sci-edu-culture etc. bodies, funded by
the Union Government.
• All such departments/PSUs/Bodies have a vigilance division- headed
by Chief Vigilance Officer (CVO).
• This CVO maintains liaison between department vs CVC (+CBI).
• +/- Lokayukta
• state vigilance commission=>Anti-corruption bureau (ACB)
• Vigilance division in each department.

Whenever complaint has vigilance angle, boss (Administrative authority) should

forward it to Vigilance division in the headquarter. Further action based their advice.
Vigilance angle is definitely present in following situation:

• Bribes: giving/ demanding/accepting bribes

• Obtaining valuable thing, without consideration from person he has
official dealings with.
• Disproportionate assets.
• misappropriation, forgery, cheating, tempering official records

Vigilance angle may be present in:

• officer makes excessive delay in clearing a file/project/work (perhaps

because he is lazy or because he wants bribes)
• Doesn’t keep his superiors informed in time.
• uses his discretionary powers in excess, where no public interest is
evident
• Gross negligence or willful negligence,
• reckless decision making,
• blatantly violates rules, procedures and manuals

in all such Issues, vigilance division will decide future course of action which is:
conduct enquiry by itself /departmental officers/ CBI/ ACB depending on jurisdiction
and gravity of allegation.

• Absence of vigilance angle = does not mean that the concerned official
is not liable to face the consequences of his actions.
• Even if no vigilance angle is present (or proved), official will still face
disciplinary action under the service conduct rules that we saw in previous
article.

Anyways, so far we saw complaints involving vigilance angle. Now the other types:

#2: Administrative Angle

• e.g. late attendance, disobedience, insubordination, negligence of

duty, technical irregularities, sleeping on duty etc.
• in such cases, boss (Administrative authority) himself has to take
action. If his enquiry reveals any vigilance/criminal angle, he should forward
matter accordingly + take disciplinary action for violation of conduct rules.

#3: Criminal Angle

• e.g. theft of office computer, cable wires, accident of government

 vehicle etc.
• Forward to local police.

So far, Complaint is received=>classified in three angles (vigilance, administrative and

criminal). Next step is:

Administrative angle=>

Preliminary enquiry=>departmental proceedings =>punishment.

vigilance/criminal angle=>

Discreet/regular enquiry=>FIR=>investigation=>court proceedings =>punishment.

we’ll see about them in detail, in the next article. for the moment, let’s check some case
studies

Case studies

• in the following cases, DevAnand is a Superintending Engineer in

PWD department and has received complaint about his junior engineer Prem
Chopra. and Dev has to decide- what to do with the complaint.
• Rule of thumb: If the nature of complaint is such that Dev will have to
make enquiries to private citizen, examining non-official records, bank lockers,
conducting search-seizures etc. = he doesn’t have such investigation powers like a
police officer.
• in such situation, He should better forward the matter to vigilance
division (=>ACB, CBI) / local police.

Complaint: Prem Chopra has acquired a large farmhouse in another state using ill-
gotten money from contractors. Then blah blah blah…

WRONG APPROACH

RIGHT APPROACH

• Dev should file RTI to the land record office of given state to find
ownership of the farm house.
• Should personally visit that farmhouse and inquire the neighbors /
chowkidars / real estate agents about the owner.
• should seek explanation from Prem
• Should immediately suspend Prem Chopra and order inquiry.
• Disproportionate asset= vigilance angle. Dev should forward the
 complaint to vigilance division=>ACB.
• ACB will first launch discreet enquiry for disproportionate assets,
once substantial matter is found, they’ll lodge FIR, make raid on his house, bank
account, lockers and his game will be over. He’ll be prosecuted under prevention
of corruption act.
• then, Dev should suspend him=>launch disciplinary action.

Complaint: Prem Chopra used substandard material in construction of municipal

building. then blah blah blah

WRONG APPROACH

RIGHT APPROACH

• Should immediately suspend Prem Chopra and order inquiry.

• Should forward the complaint to local police / vigilance commission.
first is Technical/Administrative Angle: should inspect the building quality by himself.
If prima facie mischief appears=> vigilance angle.
Complaint: Prem Chopra secretly takes bribes from contractors via his wife’s SBI bank
account. Then blah…blah blah..

WRONG APPROACH

RIGHT APPROACH

• Dev should write a letter to SBI manager to get detailed transections

Prem’s Wife’s bank account.
• Then he should verify if there is any pattern of money donations by
local contractors.=> suspend Prem Chopra=>order inquiry=>dismiss him.
• Vigilance angle. Besides Dev has no power to get bank account details
of a private citizen. Forward matter to vigilance division=>ACB.
• ACB will first launch discreet enquiry for disproportionate assets,
once substantial matter is found, they’ll lodge FIR, make raid on his house, bank
account, lockers and his game will be over. he’ll be prosecuted under prevention
of corruption act.
• then, Dev should suspend him=>launch disciplinary action.

Complaint: Dev is the Superintending Engineer in PWD department. Local resident

Madan Puri complaints how junior engineer Prem Chopra misbehaved with his
daughter during Navratri night. But he doesn’t want to file FIR to protect his
daughter’s honor… then blah..blah..blah..
WRONG APPROACH

RIGHT APPROACH

• Dev should immediately callup Prem and seek his explanation /

warn / reprimand / suspend him etc.
• Criminal angle. Besides incident happened outside Dev’s office,
during off-duty hours. Dev cannot go around inquiring private citizen witnesses.
• So, he should suggest the father to lodge complaint with local police
and assure him that police and press donot divulge identity of female in such
cases.

if police arrests Prem Chopra, then Dev should transfer/suspend him and order
departmental inquiry for violation of conduct rules.

Complaint: Dev is the Superintending Engineer in PWD department. Local resident

Ranjith comes to his office and complaints any of the following, about his junior
engineer Prem Chopra,

• Prem sold me his old laptop knowing fully well that it was faulty. Now
laptop stopped working completely. I asked him to return money but he refuses.
• Prem is living as paying guest in my house but has not paid rent for
last three months.

+Ranjith also mentions how desperately he needs money for his younger sister’s
wedding / ill mother’s cancer treatment and requests DevAnand to cut money from
Prem Chopra’s salary and give it to him.

WRONG APPROACH

RIGHT APPROACH

• Dev should immediately callup Prem and seek his explanation / make
preliminary enquiry by himself and make payment to Ranjith from Prem
Chopra’s salary.
• These matters are outside Dev’s authority. He cannot directly cut
money from Prem’s salary and give it to Ranjith.
• He should advice Ranjith to seek relief from court.
• If court rules in favour of Ranjith, Dev could initiate disciplinary
action against Prem Chopra for violating conduct rules.

Whistle-blowing

Dev is an under-secretary in coal ministry- well known among the staff as an honest,
upright officer. One day GuruDutt, the PA to Coal minister comes to see him. Guru
talks about a secret deal going on between the minister and certain industrialists for
allotment of blocks for hefty bribes….how the secretary and upper echelon of
bureaucracy is also involved in this scam. Guru also shows him incriminating
documentary evidences that prima facie prove all of his allegations. However Guru
fears reprisal and hence afraid to lodge complaint. What should Dev do?

wrong approach

right (atleast for the exam!)

• Dev / Guru should Write anonymous / pseudonymous complaint to

CBI/CVC/PMO etc. (wrong because they are not required to act on such
anonymous complaints)
• Dev should inform Guru about the existing mechanism to protect
whistleblowers, and ask him to forward the documentary evidence to CVC under
that.
• If Guru is still afraid, Dev should ask him to handover the documents,
file complaint under whistle blower protection mechanism to CVC himself.

Following approaches debatable for directly talking to outsiders, without going to

CVC/CBI first, and thus violating the sacred conduct rules.

• Leak the story to media.

• Leak the story to some NGO, ask them file PIL/writ petition in court.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Enquries: Preliminary, Discreet, Regular; Prevention of Corruption Act features,
Investigation & case studies
Prologue

So far, we’ve seen

• Conduct Rules
• sources of complaints (about misconduct / corruption)

Now time for different types of enquires and investigation and the prevention of
corruption Act.

Preliminary Enquiry

Suppose case study runs on following theme:

An NGO/Reporter/Citizen comes in Collector DevAnand’s Office and complaint how
Tehsildar Prem Chopra is stalling a file/work for the want of bribes……What should
DevAnand do?

Wrong approach

DevAnand should immediately suspend Prem Chopra and initiate a departmental

inquiry then…blah…blah…blah…

Right approach

DevAnand should conduct a preliminary enquiry to ascertain the facts…If prima facie it
appears Prem Chopra involved in a wrongdoing then……blah…blah…blah…

so what is this preliminary enquiry and how is it different from regular departmental
inquiry?

What is a preliminary enquiry?

• Preliminary enquiry is a fact-finding enquiry.

• done by the Administrative authority (e.g. head of office, head of
department- or any subordinate officer under their order)
• Done to ascertain a complaint/allegation made against a government
employee. Because if departmental inquiry is started based on a fake complaint-
it creates embarrassment for honest employee and destroys staff morale.

No protection to Accused

• Preliminary enquiry is not regular inquiry under the disciplinary

rules. It is merely a ‘tool’ to help the boss decide follow up action.
• Therefore, Art.311 or the principles of natural justice DONOT apply to
a preliminary enquiry. (Meaning accused employee doesn’t have the right to
defend himself or cross-examine the witnesses etc.)
• It is not necessary for boss to seek explanation of accused employee at
this stage-Especially when there is sufficient prima facie material to prove his
mischief.
• Accused employee has no right to be heard at this stage. Boss can
decide future course of action behind his back.
• Preliminary enquiry is not a precondition for taking disciplinary
action. (Boss can directly start disciplinary action – if there is prima facie
material.)
• There is no prescribed procedure for conducting preliminary enquiry.
Boss can follow suitable procedure as he sees fit. He may do it orally, he may do it
in writing. He may do it by himself, he may ask his junior to gather facts for him
and so on.

Cautions

• If complaint is made against a senior officer than preliminary enquiry

should be done by an officer of sufficiently higher status.
• In complaints related to quality / completion of “work” e.g. MNREGA,
IAY, PWD, roads, buildings, irrigation, NGO projects etc. the Enquiry Officer
should make surprise site inspection to verify the facts on the spot. But he should
not disturb the evidences or disclose real purpose of his visit to local staff.
• During the course of enquiry, if officer feels that it is necessary to
collect evidence from non-official persons (e.g. banker, contractor, CA, share-
broker, property dealer etc.) then further work should be entrusted to ACB/CBI
via Vigilance Department.

Resignation during Prelim Enquiry

• If preliminary enquiry is ongoing but accused employee tenders

resignation- it should not normally be accepted. Why? Because resignation
=eligible for future employment to government, pension- gratuity benefits
• But what if he did some mischief so grave that he could be dismissed
and be removed of all retirement/pension related benefits!
• Therefore, accused employee should not be allowed to escape easily
by resigning.

Bogus Complaints

• Genuine complainants should be given protection against harassment

or victimization. (i.e. by transferring/ suspending the accused employee +/-
protecting the identity of victim/witnesses as and where necessary)
• But if complaint turns out to be false and malicious after preliminary
enquiry then criminal prosecution should be launched against such
complainants- to deter other miscreants and to boost the staff morale.
• Indian Penal Code (IPC): a person making a false complaint = 6
months / fine / both (section 182)

Discreet Enquiry

• CBI/ACB has received a complaint but they donot have sufficient

material to register a regular case/FIR. They start discreet enquiry.
• A Discreet Enquiry is exploratory in nature, conducted with utmost
secrecy.
• Suspect employee is not approached directly.
• Instead, the investigating officer approaches his juniors, seniors,
 colleagues, neighbors, social contacts etc.
• He doesn’t record their statements officially. He camouflages the
purpose of meeting e.g. CBI officer contacting chowkidar of the farmhouse, in
disguise of a real-estate agent and inquiring about property owner.
• He also verifies the general reputation/lifestyle of the accused
employee.

Outcome of Discreet Enquiry?

• if complaint/allegation/tip turns out to be fake => discarded OR

• If still need to collect more material=> start Regular (Formal) inquiry.
• If substantial material gathered=>FIR is registered under prevention
of corruption act. (PCA)

Discreet Enquiry of All India Services Members(AIS)

In case of All India service member (IAS, IPS, IFoS) serving in State: – if discreet
enquiry finds something fishy, then:

• ACB sends report to Vigilance commission

• Vigilance commissioner consults with Chief Secretary of the State +
the secretary of the concerned department/ministry of the state
• GAD/Personnel for IAS
• Home affairs for IPS
• Environment and Forest for IFoS
• After that Vigilance commissioner may (or may not) authorize the
ACB to conduct a formal enquiry / register an FIR under Prevention of
Corruption Act against that All India service (AIS) officer.

^this is the mechanism in Andhra Pradesh. Other states may have some differences in
the technicalities.

• CBI also needs to follow similar action while investigating AIS officers
on deputation to central ministries/departments.
• As you can see this mechanism is meant to protect the honest officer,
but often becomes an obstacle to deal with even guilty AIS officers.
• The secretaries don’t clear the files immediately, empires within
empires, have a feudal mindset to protect their underlings= matter kept pending
for months and in the meantime guilty Officers get the opportunity to temper
witness/records/evidences.
 Regular Enquiry

• Regular Enquiry is an open enquiry (unlike the Discreet Enquiry)

• A Regular Enquiry is taken up depending on the nature of allegation,
the material available and other factors.
• Regular Enquiry may become necessary where ACB/CBI wants to
explore the complaint on a firmer ground before lodging FIR and taking up
regular investigation.
• Here the investigating officer can directly and openly approach
witnesses and accused employee.

Surprise checks

• ACB/CBI can carry out surprise checks of offices known for rampant
corruption. (Depending on their jurisdiction.)
• Following places are the first target of surprise checks:
• revenue- earning offices: sale tax, excise, octroi related
checkposts
• expenditure- incurring offices: pension, treasury, accounts office
• Focal points with direct public contact: e.g. tehsildar, patwari,
RTO, passport, social welfare etc.
• These surprise checks have dual objectives
• preventing the malpractices
• Punishing the guilty.

Salient Aspects / Principles:

• Also checks that no official has engaged a private person to perform

official functions. e.g. in RTO office, passport office, tehsildar’s office- often you
see dalal type elements doing all the filing, inspection work and the sahib merely
signs the file without even looking at its contents or at your face. This type of
Outsourcing=violation of conduct rules.
• In certain offices (e.g. Treasury/excise/pension), the employee has to
declare his personal cash in the office register every day. ACB/CBI would verify
the cash possessed by employee with reference to cash declared by them in
morning. If there is mismatch= means he took bribe or stole money from office.
• Care should be taken that very few know about it, else someone might
leak information to the given office and corrupt employees will become cautious.
• Usually Two independent public servants (from third Department)
are kept as ‘mediators’ during the check. (To ensure that neither side plays
 mischief.)
• Sometimes joint surprise checks are done with help of local police and
senior officers of the given department.
• Should be done in Remote areas- faraway tehsils as well.

Ok so far, under Ethics/Vigilance:

• We learned about the preliminary enquiry (to be done by

administrative authority / departmental officer)
• We learned about discreet and regular enquiry (to be done by CBI,
ACB officers)
• These enquiries were mostly informal in nature.

Now time for (formal) investigation. But before that, need to look at Prevention of
corruption act (PCA). Because formal investigation starts when FIR is registered under
PCA.

Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA), 1988

• Applies to whole India except J/K

• Even applies to all India citizen living outside India.

Following public servants are covered

• Employees of union, state, local authority, PSU and statutory boards.

• election commission and its employees
• Public service commission: its chairman, members and employees.
• Any PSU, company, statutory body, cooperative society, educational,
cultural, scientific institution funded by Union/State government.
• Employees of SC, HC, various tribunals.
• Govt. universities: Vice-Chancellor, registrar, Professor, reader,
lecturer and office employees
• PCA act doesn’t apply to following forces: army, navy, airforce, BSF,
coast guard and NSG

Overall, the Vigilance jurisdiction is:

offices funded by

vigilance/corruption matter looked after by

Union government

CVC=>CBI

State government

• State vigilance commission=>Anti-Corruption bureu (ACB)

• +/- Lokayukta

Special judges

• PCA Act empowers both union and state governments to appoint

special judges for anti-corruption.

Ok but what is so ‘special’ about this ‘special’ judge?

• He can order summary trial in certain situations. Summary trial

means no need for detailed examinations of witness/evidences before punishing
the accused.=> quick justice, no more “taarikh pe taarikh”
• He can grant immunity/pardon/leniency to bribe-giver or the
accomplice for their testimony.

Limitations of “Special” Judge:

• Against a state / central employee, he cannot take cognizance without

previous sanction from respective government.
• Doesn’t apply to army, navy, airforce, BSF, coast guard and NSG.

Punishments under PCA

offense

min. jail

maximum

+ fine?

Public servant taking/demanding bribes for doing official work. (even person expecting
to be a public servant is covered)

6 months

5 years

yes
middle man taking/demaing bribe for any public servant

6 months

5 years

yes

public servant taking valuable things, without consideration from a person he has
official dealings with.

6 months

5 years

yes

Voluntarily offering bribe to public servant.

6 months

5 years

yes

Criminal misconduct by Public Servant viz.

• Misappropriation of government money.

• disproportionate assets
• habitually accepts bribes
1 year
7 years
yes
Who can investigate?

With respect to PCA Act, following officers can investigate crime AND can arrest people
without warrant from magistrate.

• CBI inspector (Delhi Special Police Establishment)

• Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP)- in metropolitan areas under
police commissioner. e.g. Mumbai, Chennai, A’bad etc.
• Dy.SP (Deputy Superintendent of Police) in remaining areas.
• Any other officers empowered by state government (e.g. Anti-
corruption bureau/ ACB)
Speaking of warrants….

Types of Offenses

Just a brief overview for educational/public-awareness purpose:

Cogni vs. Non-cogni

Cognizable

Non-Cognizable

Police Officer may arrest without warrant

Police Officer has no authority to arrest without warrant

Rioting, kidnapping, murder, rape, extortion etc.

Defamation, cheating, forgery, adultery etc.

Police officer need not wait for the court orders. Has to start the investigation
immediately.

Officer doesn’t start the investigation immediately, he advises the complainant or

victim to approach the court for further directions.

Bailable-Non Bailable

Bailable

Non-Bailable

police can give bail.

Only judge can give bail.

• after arrest the accused can apply for bail to the police station officer
itself.
• The officer grants bail after obtaining proper sureties.
Police have to produce the accused in court (within 24 hours of arrest).Court decides
following
• send him police custody
• send him in judicial custody
• Give him bail.
Example forgery, defamation.
example murder, dowry death, rape, robbery etc.
What about bribes?

offense

cogni/not

bail/not

public servant taking bribe

Cognizable =can arrest without warrent

Non-bailable

middleman taking bribe on behalf of public servant

Cognizable =can arrest without warrant

Non-bailable

You can read more about all the offenses and their classification
here: vakilbabu.com/laws/Classify/Classify.htm

Anyways back to the topic: we’re seeing the prevention of corruption act. we saw its
applicability, the special judge, the investigating officers – now time for actual
investigation

(Formal) Investigation

• During investigation, Police/CBI/ACB officer has to follow the

Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.PC).
• Investigation is collection of facts to identify the guilty.
• Investigation is a probing from the known to the unknown backward
in time.

FIR in corruption cases:

• First Information Report- given by the victim / someone who has

come to know about any crime.
• But what if there is no victim? e.g. contractor voluntarily gives bribe,
engineer voluntarily accepts bribe and neither party comes to complaint! In such
cases, ACB officer himself can registered an FIR, naming ‘State: ACB’ as the
complainant. (CBI can do similar in the corruption cases related to Union
ministries/Department/PSUs)
 • Complainant has right to get FIR copy free of cost.
• F.I.R. contains following data:
• full name of the accused
• age, occupation, place of residence,
• The offense: time, data, description, motives, properties
involved if any.
• If accused employee’s name is unknown, his description should be
given.

BTW, it is necessary for CBI/ACB to register FIR before laying traps for catching bribe
givers/taker. we’ll see more of that under Trap related article later.

Investigation: Provisions and safeguards

(With respect to Prevention of Corruption Act)

• Investigating officer can take any possible evidence/parcel from

postal / telecom Department.
• Can demand bank or public offices to show him required documents
or books. But should not cause unnecessary hardship or dislocation of work to
their office personnel.
• Can attach money or other property acquired via corruption.
• Investigating Officer has power to require any person to appear before
him.
• Cannot ask a boy/girl below 15 years to come to police station. He can
only ask them question at their residence.
• Can examine the accused public servant. It serves a dual purpose; it
may clarify certain aspects and indicate his likely defense in court.
• But cannot compel the accused public servant to be a witness against
himself. Art. 20(3) of the Constitution.
• Cannot compel a government servant to disclose information
protected under Official secrets Act.
• Investigating Officer can get statements recorded by competent
magistrate.
• Investigating Officer can hold an identification parade.
• Public is legally bound to give corruption related information to
nearest magistrate / police officer.
 • Three hall marks of investigator= industry, integrity and impartiality.

Case Diary

• Investigating Officer has to maintain a diary of investigation day-to-

day.
• Court may order him to produce this diary during trial not as
evidence, but to aid it, in the trial.
• Accused public servant is not entitled to see case diary. Unless the
officer uses them to refresh his memory or the Court uses them for contradicting
the Investigating officer.

Accomplice, immunity and pardon

• Accomplice= Person who joins/helps another person to carry out

some mischief.
• An accomplice in corruption case can turn into an approver and
testify against the main corrupt public servant. This helps in speedy conclusion of
trial / proving cases where no other evidence is available.
• In such situation- the investigating officer can approach vigilance
commissioner to get ‘immunity’ to that approver (so he is not punished for
violation of conduct rules, despite testifying about his misconduct in the court by
himself)- or atleast given some leniency.
• Similarly investigating officer can also approach that ‘special’ judge to
grant pardon to the approver (so he is not punished for violation of PCA)- or
atleast given any leniency.
• Immunity /pardon is not given in every case. It is given only where
offense is serious and it is difficult to win court-case without the testimony of the
accomplice/approver.

Supreme Court on Prevention of Corruption Act

• Prevention of Corruption Act was intended to make effective

provision for the prevention of bribery and corruption rampant amongst the
public servants.
• It is a social legislation defined to curb illegal activities of the public
servants and is designed to be liberally construed so as to advance its object.
• The overall public interest and the social object is required to be kept
in mind while interpreting various provisions of this Act and deciding cases
under it.
• Supreme Court held that procedural delays and technicalities of law
should not be permitted to defeat the object sought to be achieved by this Act.
• Judge does not preside over a criminal trial merely to see that no
 innocent man is punished. A Judge also presides to see that a guilty man does not
escape.
• Miscarriage of justice arises from the acquittal of the guilty, no less
than from the conviction of the innocent.

Case Study: Bogus Sarkari hospital

Recall that case study in UPSC’s official sample paper for ethics: medical
superintendent of a district level government hospital…..he has been receiving
repeated complaintsparticularly from the patients.

First step is classify the complaints according to their angle and then decide what to
do?

Complaint 1: Very poor maintenance and un-hygienic conditions in hospital premises.

Administrative angle:

• Preliminary enquiry=>find guilty staff, supervisors and impose minor

penalties for their negligence in duty.
• Make daily rounds in hospital just to keep them scarred and busy.
• If budget permits, install biometric system to monitor attendance.

Complaint 2: The hospital staff frequently demanding bribes from the patients for the
services rendered.

Vigilance angle:

• Setup big display boards, informing the visitors about contact

numbers of ACB office/vigilance division, if anyone demands bribes.
• Raise matter with Vigilance division in state health department.
Request them to conduct surprise check/raid/trap for bribes
and disproportionate assets with help of ACB.
• Special Court will punish them as per the provisions of Prevention of
Corruption Act. But in the meantime suspend=> disciplinary action (as we saw in
first article about conduct rules- double jeopardy doesn’t apply.)
• +Make daily rounds in hospital just to keep the crook employees
scarred and busy.

Complaint 3: The negligent attitude of the Doctors resulting in casualties.

Criminal Angle:

• Preliminary enquiry=> FIR =>suspend=>disciplinary proceedings +

criminal proceedings=>punishment.
• make daily rounds in hospital just to keep the crook doctors scarred
and busy
• If budget permits, install biometric system to monitor attendance.

Complaint 4: Siphoning of a substantial stock of medicine by the staff and selling it out.

Criminal/Vigilance angle:

• Misappropriation. Forward complaint to vigilance division =ACB.

• ACB will make inquiry=> FIR => investigate=>prosecute under
prevention of corruption act (and even IPC for theft).
• +suspend everyone who gets arrested and take disciplinary action.

Administrate angle:

Make surprise check on store house etc. and (if budget permits)

• Install CCTV cameras.

• Install computerized inventory system with barcodes to keep daily
track of stock.

Complaint 5: Strong nexus between the senior Doctors of the hospital and the owners
of local private nursing homes and testing labs as a result of which the patients are
strongly misled and dissuaded from availing the hospital facilities and rather
compelled to purchase costly medicines from market and get medical tests and even
operations done from private medical houses.

Vigilance angle:

• Setup big posters showing the “Citizen Charter”- informing the

visitors about facilities available in the hospital, Administrative charges and
contact numbers of important officials, local ACB and vigilance division.
• Raise matter to Vigilance division in state health department. Request
surprise check on disproportionate assets of notorious doctors with help of
ACB. (Because if doctors have such nexus- most likely they’ve made lakhs and
cores of rupees in commission.)
• As they’re being prosecuted under prevention of corruption
 act=>suspend=>disciplinary action.

Administrative angle:

Make daily rounds in hospitals, talk with patients and their relatives, ensure them
about the facilities available in hospital + just to keep the crook employees scarred and
busy.

Complaint 6: There also exist a notorious employee union which puts undue pressure
and resents any reformative step by the administration.

Administrative angle:

• Union problem will not be solved in a day or in a week.

• First fix previous problems => crook employees will face court
proceedings / departmental proceedings.
• Then other arrogant employees/doctors will amend their ways, will
learn to remain in their ‘aukaat’.
• The grip and nuisance of union will thus decrease automatically over
the time.
• + Confidence building exercise, employee rating/reward/consultation
programs etc. fancy things.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Traps in Bribery case: features, safeguards, Phenolphthalein Test & case studies
Prologue

so far we’ve seen about

• conduct rules
• complaint: sources, types and actions
• Enquiries, investigation, Prevention of Corruption Act.

Now time to lay traps in bribery cases.

Traps against Bribe takers: salient feature

• CBI/ACB lays traps to catch bribe taker (and givers) red-handed.

• Benefit: The entire case unfolds by itself as the trap is laid and
executed. CBI/ACB doesn’t need to make more efforts to gather additional
 evidences= less headache to collect evidence + high conviction rate.

Two prior-conditions for laying trap (against a bribe demanding public servant):

• Public servant (or a middle man/tout) has demanded bribe.

• Victim has given written complaint to CBI/ACB.

On other words,

• CBI/ACB cannot randomly lay traps against any public servant, just to
check whether he is honest or not. Such “sting operation” or honey-trapping is
legally forbidden.
• Just because CBI/ACB believes Mr.XYZ is in habit of taking bribes-
they cannot set a trap on him, unless someone specifically complaints about him.

Besides, CBI/ACB can also raid a premise to catch both bribe giver and bribe taker.
(without either of them complaining)

Secret Verification

Just because someone gave a written complaint = doesn’t mean CBI/ACB immediately
lays a trap. The standard operating procedure is following:

• CBI/ACB officer will ask the complainant to be ready with money and
await further instructions. (yes the victim has to arrange money. CBI/ACB won’t
help him arrange money)
• In the meantime, the officer will start a swift secret verification:
• To check background of the complainant.
• To check background of the public servant.
• To check complainant’s relation with the given public servant.

ok but WHY take above precautions?

• Once caught, corrupt officer usually makes “Loan theory” defense. In

the court, he’d say “I had given loan to that complainant. But he doesn’t want to
repay, so got me caught in this fake trap.”
• Sometimes, complainant himself is a dubious character. e.g.
Contractor Prem Chopra had prior bribe relation with that Engineer Pran. But
now Pran has mad new bribe arrangement with another contractor so Prem
wants to take revenge.
• Sometimes, Officer is honest. Complainant is the bad guy- who wants
revenge for some other matter (not giving illegal favours, property dispute, family
 dispute, love triangle etc.etc.) hence he is filling the fake bribe complaint just for
mental harassment to honest officer.

Prior permission required

let’s ignore CBI for a while and focus on ACB.

After the secret verification, ACB officer has found the complaint to be genuine. Still he
cannot immediately lay trap. He has to get permission

When complaint is against ___

need permission from ___ before laying trap

state-PSU/state service employee/private citizen

Director General (DG) of ACB

All India Service Officer (IAS, IPS, IFoS) under the state government

• DG of ACB has to get permission from Chief Secretary.

• AND in turn, Chief secretary has to get permission from Chief
Minister before giving permission to DG-ACB!

These are safeguards in Andhra. Other states may have slight difference in the
technicalities.

These safeguards are meant to prevent ACB from turning into Hitler’s Gestapo Police.
But over the years, these safeguards have become shackles:

• sometimes petty employees in DG-ACB/Chief Secretary’s office

(=clerks, peons, section officers) leak the information about the upcoming
raid/trap to that corruption official for getting ‘bakshish’ (reward)
• Sometimes Chief Secretary / CM may not give permission because
they themselves involved in the scam indirectly. Or because they don’t want to
create a scene. e.g CM took money from the corrupt officer to get him transferred
to that given plum-posting in the first place!

Similarly, CBI has to get central government’s permission before inquiring/

investigating any officers of joint Secretary level and above.

Registration of FIR

So far ACB officer has:

 • received written complaint
• made secret verification, found the complaint to be genuine
• Got permission from Director General of ACB to lay the trap.

STILL he cannot lay the trap. Now he has to register a First Information Report (FIR).
This F.I.R. together with the original complaint is sent to “Special” Judge for Anti-
Corruption. (This is the same special judge we saw in previous article related to
prevention of Corruption Act (PCA).

Special Judge has to keep this FIR secret in his personal custody until trap is executed.

Independent Witnesses

After above technicalities are finished. ACB officer has to get :

• Trap cases need indepent person to witness the transaction +/-

overhear the talk between victim and suspect public servant.
• So, ACB has to get one such witness to accompany victim to the trap
scene.
• ACB officer can use private citizen / another government servant from
a different Department to act as witness.
• Public servant, particularly gazetted officer, should assist as witness in
a bribe trap, whenever CBI/ACB/Local police requests him.
• If he refuses=violation of conduct rules.
• However he should refuse to become witness, IF he knows the
accused personally OR if he has already appeared as witness in another trap case.
(Because otherwise defense lawyer may raise doubt on his credibility.)

Phenolphthalein Test

Phenolphthalein is a light white powder and slightly soluble in water

• Phenolphthalein + acidic solution = colorless

• Phenolphthalein + neutral solution =colorless
• Phenolphthalein + alkaline/basic solution =pink color.

In ACB traps, currency notes are treated with phenolphthalein powder. This powder
adheres to the notes’ surface but hardly visible to the naked eye.

If goods are demanded as bribe- they can also be coated with phenolphthalein powder.
e.g. box of iphone /laptop/camera etc.

After corrupt official accepts (touches) those currency notes or goods=> following
procedure is done

• ACB team prepares a solution of sodium carbonate (washing soda) in

a tumbler.
• Then corrupt official is asked to dip his fingers inside this tumbler=
solution becomes pink. Because washing soda=alkaline. And Phenolphthalein +
alkaline medium=pink color. (by the way, once UPSC had asked this chemical
principle in prelims MCQ).

Search of premises

• Normally an officer caught redhanded accepting bribe- he may be a

habitual bribe-taker and possibly in possession of disproportionate assets.
• Therefore, ACB raids the house of the public servant and his relatives,
in the presence of mediators and witnesses of the locality
• bank lockers, documents related to investment, currency notes, etc.
are seized.

Trap Success

• The concerned department has to suspend the guilty official

immediately. He is presented in the special court for anti-corruption. Judge
decides whether he is guilty / how much jail time, as per the Prevention of
Corruption Act.
• Parallel to that court proceeding, the department initiates its own
departmental proceeding- to dismiss him and if he has retired then to withhold
his entire pension and gratuity.

Trap Failure

Nowadays, the corrupt officials have become cautious. They avoid touching
Phenolphthalein coated currency notes by themselves. For example

• They ask the victim to place notes in a folder.

• They ask bribes in non-physical format e.g. mobile recharge.
• They get the notes exchanged. e.g. take victim to a shop. Ask him to
give 1000 rupee note (Phenolphthalein coated) to that shopkeeper in exchange of
two fresh notes of Rs.500.
• They ‘outsource’ bribe collection work to a middleman. e.g. junior
staff/ peon/ some ‘dalal’ (agent) type unemployed person.
 • If caught, they threaten, coerce, and harass the witnesses to change
their testimony.

However these ‘dirty tricks’ don’t always protect them. In the absence of direct
evidences- even circumstantial evidences can be used for corroboration and guilty can
be punished. Even if all witnesses turn hostile. (Upheld by HCs and SC in many cases.)

Trap Failure: follow up action?

Most Department / PSUs have following policy:

• Once ACB sends report to Head of Department that Mr.xyz is

directly / indirectly caught accepting bribe. He is placed under suspension,
irrespective of whether the phenolphthalein test yielded positive result or not.
• Even if trap completely fails (i.e. neither the accused nor his
middlemen accepts notes), the accused official is transferred to a non-focus post,
pending further inquiry by the department itself.
• As we saw earlier, an ACB/CBI officer has to seek so many
permissions/precautions before laying a trap. So, if he got permission to lay the
trap= indeed something was fishy about that accused official. Hence it is justified
to transfer him to a non-focal post.

Loan theory

• (real case): official caught red-handed accepting bribe from a

contractor. Got acquitted in court using the ‘loan theory’ i.e. Contractor wasn’t
giving me bribe but he was repaying loan that I had given him earlier.
• But despite court acquittal, he had to face departmental inquiry for
violating conduct rules i.e. officer should not lend money to people he has official
dealings with.
• Subsequently he was removed from the government service.
• Art. 20 (Double jeopardy) doesn’t protect from departmental
proceedings, even if a person is acquitted in court proceedings.

Supreme Court on Trap failures

• SC has upheld the conviction against the official even when the
complainant and witnesses turned hostile during court proceedings.
• SC has upheld conviction against official even when he used a
middlemen to get the bribes and did not touch the notes by himself.
• SC has observed that circumstantial evidences can also be used for
corroboration in bribe cases, if witnesses turn hostile. Direct evidences to link
corrupt official with currency notes (phenolphthalein)= not always necessary to
convict the accused.
so far we learned about Bribe takers but what about….

Action against Bribe givers

• Dishonest traders, contractors, power-brokers and jholachhap NGOs

always attempt to bribe public servants to get illegal favors.
• Honest officers refuse bribes and think their duty is over. But that
alone is not sufficient. Because the contractor might still bribe his junior / senior
officer to get illegal favors.
• Therefore, when bribe is offered, honest officer should postpone the
deal for some future time, and bring the matter to CBI/ACB officer, so that a trap
can be laid and bribe giver can be apprehended red handed.
• If for some reasons, it is not possible to contact the CBI/ACB/ the
local police authorities immediately, then what to do?
• Honest officer should ask the bribe-giver to wait for a short time and
get any person nearby to witness the transaction and to overhear the
conversation between the bribe giver and the public servant. Then he should call
up CBI/ACB/ the local police authorities as soon as possible. (this is CVC
directive.)

If such action is taken, other unscrupulous people will think twice before offering
bribes to any public servant.

CBI FAQ on trap

Before we see a few case studies, let’s check CBI’s official FAQ for traps- for some
education/awareness:

Q. What is a ‘trap’? We often read in newspapers that CBI has caught a public servant
in a trap.

The process of catching such corrupt public servants red handed while they demand
and take bribes is popularly called the ‘trap’. It is not a legal term. A set procedure has
been devised in CBI to lay a trap against a corrupt public servant.

Q. Who provides the money used for laying the trap?

The money has to be provided by the complainant and none else.

Q. What happens to the money of the complainant provided for laying trap?

• Such money is an important piece of evidence during court trial.

 • We (CBI) put that money in court along with chargesheet.
• After completion of trial, court orders return of the money to the
complainant.
• Thus eventually money returned to the complainant after completion
of the trial.
• But keeping in view the hardships (in long pending cases)-we refund
an equivalent amount of money to the victim after filing of the charge sheet.

Q. If the complainant is so poor that he cannot arrange bribe money, does it mean that
no action can be taken against a corrupt public servant, who demands bribe?

• Certainly not. Action can be taken in such situations also.

• As per the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, sheer demand of bribe
is a punishable offence.
• It is not necessary to prove that public servant accepted bribe. Even if
it can be proved that public servant demanded bribe=>he can be convicted.
• Laying of trap is just a means of collection of evidence to prove the
guilt. It is preferred because it facilitates collection of good evidence and makes a
case full proof.
• In the absence of trap, it is difficult to collect evidence of demand of
bribe. It, however, does not mean that laying of trap is mandatory and nothing
can be done in the absence of a trap.

Q We have often heard that not only bribe taking but bribe giving is also an offence
under the law. In that case is not the complainant who hands over the bribe amount to
the accused for laying trap is also an accused?

• Certainly, bribe giving is also an offence as per of the Prevention of

Corruption Act. But only when it is given voluntarily.
• if the victim comes to law enforcement agencies soon after demand of
bribe by a public servant- he is protected from prosecution. (e.g. victim giving
bribe to public servant during a trap=>victim is not committing crime)

Q. What should an honest public servant do, when he is offered bribe by a person?

• As mentioned in the previous answer, voluntarily giving or offering

bribe is also a punishable offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
• In such a case the honest public servant should inform CBI as soon as
such an offer is made by a person. In fact such a bribe giver can also be caught
red handed by laying a trap on the complaint of the honest public servant.
• The honest public servant shall, therefore, take steps to get such
 persons punished, rather than ignoring or just reprimanding them. This will
deter the unscrupulous elements from bribe giving.

Q. It is often heard, that public servants in higher positions don’t demand or take
bribes directly but through the touts or middlemen. Does CBI take action against such
touts or middlemen also?

• Most certainly. Prevention of Corruption Act, also provides

punishment to such touts/middlemen and the public servants who employ such
touts/middlemen.
• On getting information/complaints against such touts/middlemen,
CBI lays trap against them with the help of the complainant or otherwise.
• CBI requests the general public to provide information about such
known touts/middlemen, who are active in many public offices of the Central
Government.
• CBI takes steps to verify such information at its own level and ensure
action against such touts/middlemen even without a complainant.

Q. Are there cases, when CBI has simultaneously taken action against the willing bribe
giver and the bribe taker?

Yes, there have been such cases. If CBI receives information about a willing bribe giver
and bribe taker from any genuine source before the bribe is actually handed over, it
verifies such information and lays a trap to catch both the bribe giver and bribe taker
red handed.

Case Studies

Trap for “Good” Blackmail

DevAnand and GuruDutt are two CBI officials investigating the missing files in coal-
gate. They suspect Joint Secretary Prem Chopra in coal ministry has hid/destroyed
those files- or atleast he knows something. But so far, they’ve found no leads, tips,
witnesses or evidences to link Prem Chopra with this crime.

CBI chief Pran humiliates them on daily basis for being lazy/idiots/incompetent etc. he
has told them “I want result by ANY MEANS necessary, because Media has blown this
news out of proportion. I don’t want any more negative publicity for CBI.”

Guru becomes restless and proposes following plan to DevAnand:

• I’ll get a friend of mine to pose as a canteen operator.

• He’ll approach Joint Secretary Prem Chopra with bribes to get the
 canteen contract for in coal ministry’s building.
• From what I’ve heard, Prem does accept bribes for canteen contracts,
office stationary etc. So I’m damn sure Prem will accept the bribe, we’ll catch him
red handed in the trap and use that to blackmail him to reveal everything he
knows.
• We’ll also offer to make him government witness and immunity if he
reveals where the files are hidden- so ‘carrot and sticks’ this will work and we’ll
get our job done!

What should DevAnand do?

Hint:

• To setup a trap, two conditions must be met:

• Public servant has demanded bribe
• victim has given written complaint.

(OR CBI has received credible information that bribe exchange is going to happen at
xyz place.)

• Otherwise, CBI cannot randomly lay traps on a public servant merely

out of suspicion or just to check his honesty.

So, Answer is No- Dev shouldn’t participate in this plan of GuruDutt. He should try to
dissuade Guru from executing this plan. If Guru doesn’t listen then he should inform
their superior officer.

btw, if Dev snitches about Guru to their boss- isn’t that ‘unethical / betrayal of trust”?
No, because conduct rules demand that Dev should inform his superior about any
wrongdoings going in the office. He too may face disciplinary action, if he passively
allows Guru to continue with his plan.

Mercy on the Middleman

Sunny Deol needs domicile certificate to apply in Indian Army as soldier.Tehsildar asks
him to fillup a form and get certificate from local police that no criminal case is
registered against him. Head Constable demands Rs.500 to get this work done. Sunny
approaches local ACB officer DevAnand. A trap is laid and constable is caught red
handed accepting the bribe. Dev starts the paperwork but suddenly leave the room to
attend a phone call. Now only Sunny and HeadConstable are left in the room. Head
Constable tells Sunny following:

• Listen son, I’ll give you 5000 rupees if you take back your complaint
 right now and I’ll also get you your domicile certificate immediately.
• And God forbid, if you fail in that soldier recruitment, I promise you,
I’ll get you a job at my brother-in-law’s garment shop.
• If this matter goes to court, you’ll have to appear as witness every now
and then. It’ll create lot of inconvenience to you, affect your studies for whatever
other competitive exams you’re preparing for.
• I was merely following order of my boss. I don’t even get 50 rupees
out of this 500. My daughter’s wedding upcoming, I’m about to retired. So please
show mercy. I’m not the real bad guy here, but a victim of circumstances just like
you’re.
• Besides, even if I’m convicted, this corruption will continue. Nothing
will change. so please help me out.

Hint

• of course no. Once caught, all corrupt public servant make this type of
emotional pleas. Sunny must help Dev to an example out of this head constable to
deter others from participating in corruption of their bosses.
• Under Prevention of corruption Act, Courts have upheld conviction of
corrupt public servants- even where witnesses/complainant turned hostile during
court proceeding. This constable’s game is over- irrespective of what Sunny does.
• Besides, once convicted, he is unlikely to keep his ‘promise’ (of getting
Sunny job in his brother in law’s garment shop). Therefore Sunny shouldn’t
bother helping him.

No time for small traps

DevAnand and Guru Dutt are two inspectors in ACB. One day, poor farmer visits their
office complaining how a Patwari is demanding 100 rupee for land records, via a
middleman. Guru gives him Rs.100 rupees note out of his own pocket, “give it to
midleman and get your work done. We’ve not time for such small traps.” DevAnand is
appalled, but Guru explains him following:

• you know it well the amount of technicalities and procedures to be

followed if we want to lay a trap for this petty case of 100 rupees bribe.
• Secondly, this Patwari is not taking bribes by himself but has hired a
middleman. Even if we catch this middleman red-handed, it’ll take a hell load of
investigation and paperwork to corroborate his link with the official.
• Overall, we’d be occupied for no less than five months in this stupid
case.
• Tax payer’s money is better spent IF we pour our time and effort in
catching the bigger fishes instead- who demand thousands and lakhs of rupees as
 bribes.
• Still if you want to proceed then go ahead, do it on your own. I’ll not
help in this stupid trap or investigation.

What should DevAnand do?

hints:

• GuruDutt’s logic is faulty. It is not just one case of 100 rupees. Patwari
is demanding bribes from all farmers. And most probably other Patwaris in
nearby villages also doing the same. so collectively the scam runs in lakhs of
rupees + the amount of agony and hardship caused to poor farmers=you can’t put
a price tag on everything.
• Dev should try to convince Guru why it is in public interest to chase
even petty cases- to set fear in the hearts of all other petty officials who demand
bribes.
• IF Guru doesn’t agree, Dev should initiate trap proceeding by himself
and inform their boss about Guru’s approach towards work, conduct rules
and [Ethics].

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Suspension: Meaning, Features, Reasons; Death, Resignation, Promotion during
suspension & Case Studies
Prologue

so far in the vigilance/ethics series we’ve seen

• Conduct rules
• Complaints
• Enquiries
• Traps

Now it’s time to suspend crooked government employees.

Suspension

What is suspension?

An order that debars the public servant from using his powers and doing his duties.
Why suspend?

• So he cannot temper with records, evidences or witnesses – directly /

indirectly using his official position.
• Witnesses may hesitate to depose/testify against the Government
servant as long as he is in office.
• To sustain confidence of people in the system, until inquiry is
finished.

Suspension: salient features?

• Suspended employee retains the master-servant relationship with

government.
• Meaning, he is still subject to all the conduct rules applicable to
Government servants. e.g. cannot participate in political activities, cannot lend
money at interest, cannot speculate in share market etc.
• He is still liable for any new misconduct during the period of
suspension.
• Suspension itself is not penalty. It is only an ‘aid’ to facilitate the
inquiry. Therefore Art.311 doesn’t apply. (=he is not entitled to defend himself,
cross examine witnesses etc.)
• Employee can be suspended even if he is on leave/ training /
absconding.
• Retrospective order of suspension is illegal. e.g. on 12th Nov. 2013
Boss cannot write an order that “Mr. XYZ is suspended with effect from 11th Nov
2013.”
• Retrospective reinstatement is also illegal. e.g. on 12th Nov 2013. Boss
cannot write an order to reinstate a suspended officer with effect from
11th Nov.2013.

Suspending AIS officers

• According to All India Services rules, the State government can

suspend a member of All India services (IAS, IPS, IFoS) serving under the state
government.
• However, such suspension will become invalid IF the state
government doesn’t start disciplinary proceedings against that officer within 90
days. (although in rare cases, this limitation can be ignored IF union government
permits.)

Suspending Officers on deputation

• For example- An IFoS officer (belonging to Environment ministry) is

 deputed on some xyz post in Tribal Ministry. Can Tribal ministry suspend him?
Yes they can.
• But the borrowing authority (Tribal ministry) have to inform the
lending authority (Environment ministry) about the circumstances that led to
suspension.

Suspension: When?

• In the exam, you might face a tempting Case study where you want to
write ‘suspend xyz officer’. But “suspension” is not the answer in every case study.
• Suspension causes a lasting damage to Government servant’s
reputation even if he is exonerated or is ultimately found guilty of only a minor
misconduct. This damages staff morale.
• Therefore decision should be taken after taking all factors into
account with care and caution.
• Usually when a complaint is made against any officer, standard
operating procedure is:

complaint

action

Administrative angle=>

Preliminary enquiry=>departmental proceedings =>punishment.

vigilance/criminal angle=>

Discreet/regular enquiry=>FIR=>investigation=>court proceedings =>punishment.

The decision to suspend usually comes after the prelim/discreet/regular enquiry is

finished.

Guiding Principle: ‘public interest vs. cost to exchequer’. Because

• suspended employee gets salary without doing any work=burden on

public exchequer. And
• suspended employee=less manpower in the office= Workload
increases.

Therefore, in minor administrative misconducts, don’t suspend. Just finish inquiry

impose any minor penalty on him and finish the case. For example,

• If an employee is caught filing bogus LTC claim.

 • Brought fake certificate from doctor to get medical leave.
• Occasionally came late to office/ left the office early.
• Damaged some office equipment by mistake.

Must be suspended?

In following situation, he must be suspended:

• serious negligence/dereliction of duty

• Refuses to obey written orders of superior officer.
• He is facing Criminal investigation. Then he should be suspended
even if he is released on bail.
• prima facie there is sufficient material to give him a major penalty
(viz. dismiss, remove, rank-reduction)
• If State government asks an All India services officer (IAS, IPS, IFoS)
to go on leave but he refuses.
• caught red pink handed in phenolphthalein test during ACB/CBI trap
for bribes.
• In all Public scandals. Must be suspended to restore public faith in
system.
• When preliminary (informal) enquiry reveals some wrongdoing. And
if he continues in service, he is
• likely to influence investigation e.g. temping with
witness/documents/evidences
• likely to subvert official discipline
• likely to bring down staff morale
• Any conduct involving moral turpitude (lewdness, sexual harassment,
dowry etc.)
• Misuse of official powers for personal gains
• Misappropriation, embezzling Government money; his negligence
caused serious loss to public exchequer
• has disproportionate assets.
• Deserted his post during crisis period.
• endangering national / state security

Arrest and Automatic suspension

 • If a government employee has spent more than 48 hours in custody-
he is automatically “deemded” suspended. (Even if his boss don’t know about
that he is arrested.)
• if he is arrested in dowry death case- must be suspended, irrespective
of how many hours spent in custody.
• If a government servant is arrested, Police has to inform his superior.
• Arrested employee himself too has the duty to inform his superior as
soon as possible. If he hides details of his arrest, he will be subjected to a separate
disciplinary proceedings (and punishment). And he cannot claim double
jeopardy.

Salary during Suspension

• Suspended employee doesn’t get full salary but gets subsistence

allowance.
• Subsistence allowance is meant for the “subsistence” of him and his
family. Why?
• Just because he is not allowed perform job, his family should
not be made to suffer.
• Out of desperation for money, he might involve in some other
mischief.
• Suspension itself is not punishment. But a tool to help in
investigation.
• Subsistence allowance= approximately half the average salary. (Also
get Dearness Allowance (DA), compensatory (city) allowance, house rent
allowance.)
• Government can decrease this allowance: IF Suspension prolongs
because of officer’s fault. e.g. he adopts dilatory tactics, doesn’t cooperate with
investigation etc.
• Government can increase this allowance if suspension prolongs
without officer’s fault. e.g. departmental officials are not finishing inquiry
quickly.
• Subsistence allowance falls under taxable income. Meaning
suspended employee has to pay income tax (if he falls under tax-brackets)
• If he continues to live in government quarters then he has to pay
house rent and allied charges of electricity, water, telephone bill etc.
• From his subsistence allowance, government cannot deduct
GPF/provident fund contribution, postal insurance premium etc. unless he
agrees.
 Part time job during Suspension

• Suspended employee can take up other employment, business,

profession during suspension but ONLY with permission from government
• But If he start such private job/business, then government will stop
paying him subsistence allowance, DA, HRA.
• If he start such private job/business without government’s permission
=> he can face separate punishment under conduct rules. And cannot claim
double jeopardy. (i.e. he cannot make excuse that I’m punished twice for same
offense.)

Resignation during Suspension?

What if suspended officer gives his resignation before departmental inquiry / court
case is completed?

DoPT guidelines for all India services officers (IAS, IPS, IFoS):= Normally, such
officers are placed under suspension only in cases of grave delinquency, it would not be
correct to accept a resignation of an officer under suspension.

Resignation should be accepted IF

• Inquiry is taking forever to finish. It would cheaper on public

exchequer to accept resignation.
• Evidences are not strong enough to dismiss / remove that suspended
officer if inquiry/criminal case continues.
• Alleged offence does not involve moral turpitude. (Lewdness in office,
sexual harassment, rape, dowry death etc.) Ruchika Girhotra case is a prime
example of moral turpitude by an IPS officer.

Corollary to that, resignation should not be accepted IF

• Inquiry is about to finish.

• Strong evidences are found- it is possible to dismiss/remove that
officer when inquiry is concluded.
• Alleged offence involves moral turpitude.

Leave for employee under investigation?

Suppose, ACB/CBI is investigating the matter. Employee is not suspended but

transferred to a non-focal post. In such situation, he should not be granted leave- to
prevent him from tampering with investigation. (Except in rare/genuine cases e.g.
medical emergency.)
 Reinstatement

After a government servant is suspended, four things can happen:

departmental inquiry/proceeding finds him ____

consequence

• guilty with Major penalty (removal, dismissal, compulsory

retirement)
His Game Over. No need to reinstate.
• guilty but with ‘minor penalty’
Suspended employee has to be reinstated.
• ‘not guilty’
officer has to be reinstated.
• inquiry not finished in two years
Department may reinstate him back to the job. (except during grave cases or when two
years passed because he did not fully cooperate with inquiry)
for example:

• 2006: encounter specialist Daya Nayak: got suspended for

disproportionate asset.
• 2009: ACB could not unearth any evidence to prove the charges
against Nayak, and thus could not file a chargesheet
• 2012: Daya Nayak reinstated back in the job.

Posting after reinstatement?

When Suspended officer is reinstated, he is posted far off from the place where he
served before suspension. Why?

• So he cannot do ‘witch-hunting’ or take revenge on any junior staff (or

local public) who may have given complaint/ evidence / testimony against him
during the inquiry
• Saves him from uncomfortable situation/embarrassment while
dealing with same local public and colleagues.
• Saves local public from any negative vibes or fear of reprisal while re-
visiting the same office.

Promotion/ Increment after reinstatement?

If suspended officer is reinstated, it means two things could have happened:

departmental inquiry/proceeding

consequences

found him “not guilty”

• He is entitled to get all salary, increment, promotion benefits that he

couldn’t get during suspension period.
• Even in future- he is eligible for all the promotion, increment benefits.
• for example Durga Shakti Nagpal=>suspended=>reinstated with full
honors.
found him guilty, gave ‘minor punishment’
• It depends on government’s discretion of how much benefit he
deserves.
• Supreme Court has said: “acquittal does not automatically entitle the
Government servant to get the consequential benefits as a matter of course.”

Promotion during Suspension: Sealed Cover Procedure

• What if a government servant is suspended but the ‘promotion round’

comes for his batchmates?
• In such case, “Sealed Cover” procedure is adopted.
• Government servants in respect of whom prosecution for a criminal
charge is pending.
• Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) will assess his suitability
for promotion without taking into consideration the disciplinary case/ criminal
prosecution pending.
• Then, DPC will write its recommendation in a ‘sealed cover’. (whether
to promote him or not?)
• This sealed cover will be the disciplinary case/criminal case is over.
• if he is completely exonerated=> will get promotion, if sealed cover
says yes. This promotion will be with retrospective effect. Meaning if others had
got promotion after him, during his suspension – he’ll still be considered their
senior and get salary accordingly.
• but if he is found guilty in disciplinary case/ criminal case, the sealed
cover’s recommendation will be ignored.

Death during suspension?

• If suspended officer dies before the departmental inquiry / court case

is concluded then the period between the date of suspension and the date of
death shall be treated as “duty”.
 • And his family is paid full pay and allowances for the said “duty”
period.

anyways, enough theory, let’s check some case studies.