- Preliminary Enquiry
- What is a preliminary enquiry?
- Discreet Enquiry
- Discreet Enquiry of All India Services Members(AIS)
- Regular Enquiry
- Surprise checks
- Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA), 1988
- (Formal) Investigation
- Supreme Court on Prevention of Corruption Act
- Case Study: Bogus Sarkari hospital
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.
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.
- 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.
- 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)
- 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 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.
- 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|
- 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.
||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
|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.|
|police can give bail.||Only judge can give bail.|
||Police have to produce the accused in court (within 24 hours of arrest).Court decides following
|Example forgery, defamation.||example murder, dowry death, rape, robbery etc.|
What about bribes?
|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
- 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.
- 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 complaints particularly 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
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.
- 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.
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.
- 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.
You’re welcome to post more points about this case study in the comments below.
In the next article, we’ll see about the traps in bribery cases.
thank you sir:)
One of the very best case study/analysis ………
I am not into UPSC / Banking or any other Govt Job Search. I am a Professional. I read your articles for my knowledge purpose. I personally believe that you should be given HONORARY UPSC PASS CERTIFICATE.
Keep writing. Gr8 Compilation and Explanation Power.
Gandhi ji never got peace nobel.. but whoever gets it says that he/she was inspired by Gandhi ji
thank u mrunal……
Good analysis Mrunal, Kudos for all your efforts must read for mains -2013
mind blowing job…
mrunal, ur answers hv lot of scope of improvement. Pls refer S K Mishra sirs notes/classes, his mentality etc to write superior answers. or thinking of any Retired IAS. u r doing gr8 job, hence bothered to write this. Keep it up!!
is this mr. s k mishra , the great ?????
i am.. i bothered to write… :)
Regarding employee union –
Employee union is not always a bad thing , it is there to protect any arbitraty executive action against employee.but if it turns notorious and creat day to hurdle then it is not desirable. Caution must be taken in handling because their are chances of backfire. Two way sttategy must be adopted
1. Talking ro employee in open manner , listening their genuine problem and try to solve it in participatry manner and cordinating with them in emphatetic manner. Try to communicate and develop some informal relation with employee so that they don’t consider you alien.
2. Make it very clear that any thing against organisatiinal goal is not desirable and will not be entertained. Any mischeive will be dealt with reasonable action and no partiality or favor will be done in dealing with it. at a same time encourage employee by giving recognition and reward for their good performance.
After all we have to work as a team and meet the excellency in our performance. Positive and healthy enviroment can solve much of problem.
The presentation of the topics are excellent………………………….
Looking at the solutions to each sub cases sequentially, I felt there was too much attention given to the punishment angle and little scope to the reform angle. The higher official whomsoever is trying to correct the system must have a positive faith towards the system. Nowhere in the solution there was a mention of a meeting or taking the views of the subordinates(of those some may be having some genuine issues making them difficult to adhere to their duties). The higher official must not only address the problems of the clients but also should maintain the positive morale of the employees in the organisation.
The hospital case study is not hypothetical by the way, it a reality. Mrunal sir solved it in 5 minutes and our great collector doesn’t even bother to know what the hell is going on in those damn hospitals. Here (Hisar, one of the advanced districts in Haryana) deliveries have taken place in the civil hospital toilet because the staff says no beds available, keep the patients hanging for so long that labor pains start and then the the patient’s family have no closed place other than the toilet. Humanity gets disgraced. I feel criminal proceedings can be started against the hospital staff for such grave neglect of duty but in incredible India no action is taken, and the tragedy keeps repeating.
there are many associations for eg, routine train travellers association,routine bus users association are there in our society with some rights or more of whistleblowing activity who can ensure q&q of their service.but in case of hospitals can u think of such routine users thing. yes we can there are many senior citizens who avail drugs for NCD’s among whom we can seed the spirit and strength of association. we could believe them, against frivolous complaints ,on their seniority.
127,4th main, anam enclave,Thanisandra,
I wanted to know under what authority/regulation/act/section/rules, the Director of C.B.I. under notification/administrative letter accorded permission to state lokayuktha(karnataka) for laying TRAP of central govt.employees? Whether c.b.i. is in order to direct state lokayuktha like this? According to Karnataka State Lokayuktha Act, the central govt employees/any psu owned by govt.of india does not fall under its jurisdiction for laying trap.On the basis of permission/clarification issued by c.b.i. the state lokayuktha in karnataka conducting trap & raid and thereafter transfering case to c.b.i.for further followup.Kindly clarify.
In cases of complaints of corrupt practices by a Autonomous body established by Act. Who can conduct inquiry?
For example State Pharmacy Council, in whose case the Pharmacy Act requires a commission be set up for enquiry in cases of complaints. Can a officer from the Department (other than a officer from Police, Vigilance) conduct such inquiry?
Ur site /blog is very educative and good one.
can a trap can be arranged without registering fir? what is evedentiary value as it is not during investigation? pl guide
Sir please guide me about how to deal
with case studies in ethics, integrity and aptitude
whether trap done by coporation vigilance wing under pc act