• 

India is a Union of States but has strong features of a Federation. It comprises States and Union Territories – the States have their own legislatures and administrative machinery and the Union Territories are governed by laws passed by the Parliament of the country and function under the administrative machinery of the Centre.

For the purpose of legislation, the Constitution of India provides for three lists, with different legislative competence for the Union and the States to legislate on items in the lists:

• the Union List has subjects on which the Union Parliament only can legislate;
• the State List has items on which different State Legislatures can legislate, which of course will be valid within the territory of the concerned State; and
• the Concurrent List contains subjects on which both the Union Parliament and the State Legislatures can legislate, but in cases of conflict the Union will have primacy over the States.

Anti-corruption measures fall into two categories:

• Prosecutorial and
• Administrative Sanctions.

The former involves action by the police and courts, under the criminal justice system, and the latter by respective vigilance (oversight) departments of the Governments.

Policing is a State matter in India and functions under the administrative control of the State Governments. Thus State Legislatures enact laws concerning the Police.

In 1941 a Special Police Establishment (SPE) was set up in the Department of War to handle corruption cases, arising out of various defence-related purchase deals in Delhi.

The Delhi Special Police Establishment (DSPE) Act was enacted in 1946, laying the foundation for the present day Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) of India. The CBI was set up by a Home Ministry Resolution on 1 April 1963, as the premier anti-corruption agency in India. However, in order to get over the legal constraint of securing an India-wide jurisdiction, it started functioning in a number of States after first getting their consent. With the consent of the State Governments, either blanket or conditional, the CBI now carries out investigations in other States. So, in practice, the CBI works as a Federal Police Force in India on a borrowed mandate from the State Governments. 

Apart from the consent route, it can also take up any case in any part of India, if directed by any High Court (highest court in a State) or the Supreme Court (the highest court in India). Initially, the offences that were referred by the Central Government to CBI related only to corruption by Central Government servants. In due course, with the setting up of a large number of Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs), the employees of these Undertakings were also brought under CBI's purview. Similarly, with the nationalisation of the banks in 1969, the public sector banks and their employees also come within the ambit of the CBI.

There is no concept of a federal crime in India. Initially, the Indian Penal Code (IPC) of 1860 defined and provided for punishment for offences of bribery and corruption amongst public servants.

During the Second World War, it was felt that a new law was required, paving the way for the enactment of the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act in 1947, which was subsequently amended in 1952 and 1964 and finally replaced by the current Act, Prevention of Corruption Act of 1988.

The Indian anti-corruption law is primarily public servant centric. Corruption in the private sector is generally outside the scope of this legislation, except when private persons are charged with abetting corruption or involved in other penal offences like forgery, cheating, dishonest misappropriation, criminal breach of trust etc. In India, both bribe-givers and bribe-takers are punishable under the PC Act. A bribe-giver would be charged with the offence of abetting the crime.

Agencies entrusted with the Investigation of Corruption cases:

• the CBI at the all India level, subject to the consent of States – It is also the Nodal Agency (NCB) for Interpol in India;
• the State Police – Anti-Corruption Bureau; and

• Lok Ayukts (Ombudsman).

 

Agencies entrusted with Administrative Sanction (Vigilance/Oversight):

• Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) at all-India level – over matters concerning Union Government and Public Sector Undertakings (PSU) employees (CVC also oversees the work of the CBI concerning corruption cases); and
• Central Vigilance Officers (CVOs) in different Government Departments or PSUs like Customs, Income Tax, Banks and Financial Institutions etc.

Public servants in India are governed by a Code of Conduct for reporting transactions above a specified threshold limit, filing Annual Immovable Property Returns, clearance from the Vigilance/Oversight wings in specified situations (such as before posting an officer in a sensitive post, promotion, deputation, foreign visits, prior permission or intimations for certain types of transactions). In the event of violation of the Code of Conduct, public servants are liable to face disciplinary action.  

Apart from the Executives, the Code of Conduct is also applied to the legislatures and the judiciary. The candidates for election to the Parliament and the State Legislatures file affidavits with the Election Commission of India, declaring their assets. Ministers also file such returns with the Prime Minister on a regular basis. The judges of the Supreme Court also file returns to the Chief Justice of India, although these are not open to the general public.   

The Right to Information Act (RTI) of 2005 has proved to be effective in combating corruption in India, including 'Grand Corruption'. The Speaker of the Lok Sabha (the lower house of Parliament), has clarified that the Members of the Parliament are public servants and anyone seeking details of the assets of any Member can file applications under the RTI, and the information will be made available for viewing in person. While the judges have been held to be public servants by the Chief Justice of India (CJI), there is a difference of opinion as to whether the information, filed by the judges with the CJI, should be made available to the public under the RTI or not.

In line with the TI, the CVC has also introduced the concept of 'Integrity Pact', which is effective from the stage of invitation of bids until completion/execution of the project. It prescribes for Agreements between the prospective bidders/vendors, binding the buyers not to enter into any corrupt practices or exercise corrupt influence. This is monitored by a panel of Independent External Monitors (IEM). There are numerous instructions from the CVC for ensuring transparency in the procurement process, encouraging competition, and fairness in advertisement for tender, and to give adequate time to the bidders to respond etc.  

The CVC also issued an Order for Whistle Blowers in 2004 i.e. Resolution on Public Interest Discloser and Protection of Informer. But the Order is not applicable to State Government employees, as the CVC has no jurisdiction over them. Anonymous or pseudonymous complaints are, however, not entertained by CVC.

There is no specific law on corruption in the private sector but there is a statutory requirement for a system of audit; the existing regulations, and company laws address various issues relating to fraudulent practices in the private sector. The courts have also discouraged such practices by disallowing tax deductibility of expenses that constitute bribes. 

Indian Civil Society is very active in outreach and preventive activities in anti-corruption movements and has devised innovative schemes such as printing and distributing 'No Bribe Rupee Notes', taking 'A national pledge not to pay a bribe' etc. The media, particularly the electronic media, has taken many proactive steps in exposing corruption at high places through sting operations.