Why shouldn’t the Goondas Act be amended so as to allow detention of corrupt public officials?.In an order smacking of exasperation at the rampant and continuing corruption in government departments, particularly in registration departments, Justice N Kirubakaran of the Madras High Court has directed the state to seriously consider the above question..The order follows strong observations made last month in this regard by Justice Kirubakaran. While hearing a case relating to the release of documents by the State Registration Department, the judge was appraised of an informal broker system in place, designed to extract bribes from the public..In the present case, the petitioner was constrained to approach the Court after the Department delayed the release of certain documents for over a year without justification. This, it was argued, was deliberately done to pressurise the petitioner to pay bribes to the officials at the Department..While the petitioner’s documents were finally released after the matter was placed before the Court, it was noted that,.“…but for the case filed by the petitioner, the petitioner would not have been in a position to receive the documents in the near future, unless he paid the bribe money. Not only in this case, but in most of the cases, bribe is said to be the reason for delay. Therefore, for deciding the larger issue, the writ petition is kept pending.”.The larger issue of government corruption was particularly highlighted with reference to various international surveys..“A recent survey by ‘Transparency International’ states that India is the most corrupt country in Asia, followed by Vietnam, Thailand, Pakistan and Myanmar. When it comes to bribery rate, ‘The Forbes’ article rates India as the highest in the list with 69% bribery rate. .Corruption has become rampant in all Government departments, inspite of enactment Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. It is being said that corruption has become the order of the day and most of the official functions are done only on payment of illegal gratification.”.Justice Kirubakaran expressed his disapproval for such tendencies, observing that,.“An officer who has been appointed for doing official duties and is drawing salary from the public exchequer, cannot compel/expect the public to pay bribe for doing his duty.”.Given that the instant case was only the tip of an iceberg and that almost all government offices have become bedrocks of corruption, the Court opined that there is a need to bring in urgent preventive measures in public interest..Such measures may include preventive detention, which has been justified as necessary in the Supreme Court case of Phulwari Jagdambaprasad Pathak v RH Mendonca and others. The Court reproduced the following relevant extract on this point”.“[16] …..Preventive detention measure is harsh, but it becomes necessary in the larger interest of society. It is in the nature of a precautionary measure taken for preservation of public order…….The Court has therefore posed the following questions to the state, to be answered when the case is taken up for hearing next on December 11:.Whether the State could bring out a separate preventive detention Act to detain “corrupt elements/officials/public servants” who are indulging in corruption?Why not the State Government bring an amendment to “Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Cyber Law Offenders, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Forest Offenders, Sand Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Slum Grabbers Act and Video Pirates Act, 1982” to include “Public servants taking gratification” in the Act?Till the new Act is enacted, why not the State Government invoke “Goondas Act [Act 14]” to detain corrupt officials/public servants on the ground that their corrupt acts affect adversely or likely to affect adversely the maintenance of public order?How many raids have been conducted by DVAC throughout the State in all the Departments including Registration offices, for the past 10 years?How many persons have been booked and arrested, for the past 10 years?How much amount has been seized by DVAC, while conducting raids, for the past 10 years?How many criminal cases have been filed each year by DVAC, for the past 10 years?What is the rate of conviction in corruption cases in the State for the past 10 years?In how many cases, conviction has been secured, for the past 10 years?Which are all the top 5 Government Departments where corruption is more as per DVAC data?What are all the problems faced by DVAC during raid, investigation and prosecuting the case before the Court?Whether man power available with DVAC is sufficient to execute their works and if it is not, what is the requirement?Whether sufficient amount is allotted to DVAC Department, in view of reporting of more number of corruption cases?Whether DVAC is making use of advanced scientific gadgets/instruments to nab the corrupt elements, while conducting raids?How many public servants have been booked on the charges of corruption or demanding bribe on more than one occasion, for the past 10 years?
Why shouldn’t the Goondas Act be amended so as to allow detention of corrupt public officials?.In an order smacking of exasperation at the rampant and continuing corruption in government departments, particularly in registration departments, Justice N Kirubakaran of the Madras High Court has directed the state to seriously consider the above question..The order follows strong observations made last month in this regard by Justice Kirubakaran. While hearing a case relating to the release of documents by the State Registration Department, the judge was appraised of an informal broker system in place, designed to extract bribes from the public..In the present case, the petitioner was constrained to approach the Court after the Department delayed the release of certain documents for over a year without justification. This, it was argued, was deliberately done to pressurise the petitioner to pay bribes to the officials at the Department..While the petitioner’s documents were finally released after the matter was placed before the Court, it was noted that,.“…but for the case filed by the petitioner, the petitioner would not have been in a position to receive the documents in the near future, unless he paid the bribe money. Not only in this case, but in most of the cases, bribe is said to be the reason for delay. Therefore, for deciding the larger issue, the writ petition is kept pending.”.The larger issue of government corruption was particularly highlighted with reference to various international surveys..“A recent survey by ‘Transparency International’ states that India is the most corrupt country in Asia, followed by Vietnam, Thailand, Pakistan and Myanmar. When it comes to bribery rate, ‘The Forbes’ article rates India as the highest in the list with 69% bribery rate. .Corruption has become rampant in all Government departments, inspite of enactment Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. It is being said that corruption has become the order of the day and most of the official functions are done only on payment of illegal gratification.”.Justice Kirubakaran expressed his disapproval for such tendencies, observing that,.“An officer who has been appointed for doing official duties and is drawing salary from the public exchequer, cannot compel/expect the public to pay bribe for doing his duty.”.Given that the instant case was only the tip of an iceberg and that almost all government offices have become bedrocks of corruption, the Court opined that there is a need to bring in urgent preventive measures in public interest..Such measures may include preventive detention, which has been justified as necessary in the Supreme Court case of Phulwari Jagdambaprasad Pathak v RH Mendonca and others. The Court reproduced the following relevant extract on this point”.“[16] …..Preventive detention measure is harsh, but it becomes necessary in the larger interest of society. It is in the nature of a precautionary measure taken for preservation of public order…….The Court has therefore posed the following questions to the state, to be answered when the case is taken up for hearing next on December 11:.Whether the State could bring out a separate preventive detention Act to detain “corrupt elements/officials/public servants” who are indulging in corruption?Why not the State Government bring an amendment to “Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Cyber Law Offenders, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Forest Offenders, Sand Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Slum Grabbers Act and Video Pirates Act, 1982” to include “Public servants taking gratification” in the Act?Till the new Act is enacted, why not the State Government invoke “Goondas Act [Act 14]” to detain corrupt officials/public servants on the ground that their corrupt acts affect adversely or likely to affect adversely the maintenance of public order?How many raids have been conducted by DVAC throughout the State in all the Departments including Registration offices, for the past 10 years?How many persons have been booked and arrested, for the past 10 years?How much amount has been seized by DVAC, while conducting raids, for the past 10 years?How many criminal cases have been filed each year by DVAC, for the past 10 years?What is the rate of conviction in corruption cases in the State for the past 10 years?In how many cases, conviction has been secured, for the past 10 years?Which are all the top 5 Government Departments where corruption is more as per DVAC data?What are all the problems faced by DVAC during raid, investigation and prosecuting the case before the Court?Whether man power available with DVAC is sufficient to execute their works and if it is not, what is the requirement?Whether sufficient amount is allotted to DVAC Department, in view of reporting of more number of corruption cases?Whether DVAC is making use of advanced scientific gadgets/instruments to nab the corrupt elements, while conducting raids?How many public servants have been booked on the charges of corruption or demanding bribe on more than one occasion, for the past 10 years?
