SEPT. 1, 2002
 Cover Story
 Editorial
 Features
 Trends
 BT Event
 Personal Finance
 Managing
 Case Game
 Back of the Book
 Columns
 Careers
 People

Q&A: Douglas Nielson
Douglas Nielson, Chief Country Officer, Deutsche Bank, India, speaks to BT Online on what the bank has in mind for India, particularly its plans in the asset management arena. Equity research, as Nielson says, will emerge as a key differentiating factor in this business, and that's exactly what Deutsche is working on.


Long Bond Is Back
The government is bringing back the 30-year bond. Will insurers be the only takers?

More Net Specials
Business Today,  August 18, 2002
 
 
Going By The Book
A public servant who demands a bribe is liable for imprisonment up to seven years and can be fined under the Prevention Of Corruption Act, and can also be subjected to disciplinary action by his department.

We are a wholly-owned subsidiary of a US company and to some extent need to adhere to provisions of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Our shareholders are concerned about occasional demands for financial favours made by officials of certain government departments in India. What legal action can we take against such government officials?

Anti-corruption laws and regulations in India prescribe penal actions that can be initiated against public servants who demand gratification, monetary or otherwise, from any person either as (i) a motive or reward for doing or forbearing to do an official act, (ii) for showing or forbearing to show in exercise of their official functions, favour or disfavour to any person, or (iii) for rendering or attempting to render any service or disservice to any person. The term "public servant" includes almost all employees and officers of central and state government departments. A public servant who makes such a demand or receives any gratification from any person, other than his legal remuneration, is punishable with imprisonment of upto seven years and can be fined under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Act), and can also be subjected to disciplinary action by his department, including termination/suspension.

  The Community Spirit
 
  Bread, Butter, and Jam  
  The Sign Of Three  

To initiate legal action under the Act against a public servant making an unlawful demand, you should lodge a First Information Report (fir) with the police station which has jurisdiction over the concerned government department specifically naming the employee making illegal demands on your company, together with details of the demand. The police will conduct an investigation pursuant to your fir, may arrest the public servant, and if the investigation discloses the commission of an offence under the Act, will file a charge sheet in the court. However, to take cognizance of an offence punishable under the Act, courts require the sanction of the central/state government. A public servant can also be suspended from office if he is arrested as per the service rules. Alternatively, to invoke departmental disciplinary action against the concerned public servant, you can complain to the Chief Vigilance Officer or head of his department or the Central/State Vigilance Commission depending whether the public servant is an employee of the central or the state government. On receipt of your complaint, these offices will conduct an inquiry and on being satisfied that such demands were made by the public servant, will advise the concerned department to take disciplinary action. These offices may also refer the matter to the CBI for further investigation and report. You may also file a complaint with the CBI which will conduct an investigation and file a charge sheet with the court for prosecution under the Act.

We export certain goods to India from Singapore. On a complaint filed against us to The Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission (MRTPC) by an Indian competitor alleging predatory pricing, we apprehend an MRTPC investigation. Can the MRTPC prohibit our exports to India and can we challenge the legal validity of such investigation considering that an anti-dumping investigation has already been conducted against us which was decided in our favour?

The Supreme Court of India has recently held in the case of PT Muliaglass Vs. All India Float Glass Manufacturing Association that the MRTPC does not have extra-territorial jurisdiction to determine export prices to India or to prohibit an exporter from exporting to India even at a low predatory price. The MRTPC may however order post-import restrictions on your goods prohibiting their sale in India if such sales in any manner can be regarded as a restrictive trade practice in India. Anti-dumping provisions contained in the Customs Tariff Act and laws concerning restrictive trade practices contained in the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act are different. Therefore, the previous anti-dumping investigation will not oust the powers of the MRTPC to conduct investigations pursuant to the complaint filed by your competitors.


The views expressed here should not be construed as legal opinion and are for reference only. Business Today and/or the author will not be responsible for any decision taken by readers on the basis of these views. Please send in your queries to Legal.bt@intoday.com or Going By The Book, c/o Business Today, Videocon Tower, 5th Floor, E-1, Jhandewalan Extn., New Delhi-110055.

 

    HOME | EDITORIAL | COVER STORY | FEATURES | TRENDS | BT EVENT | PERSONAL FINANCE
MANAGING | CASE GAME | BOOKS | COLUMN | JOBS TODAY | PEOPLE


 
   

Partners: BESTEMPLOYERSINDIA

INDIA TODAY | INDIA TODAY PLUS | SMART INC | THE NEWSPAPER TODAY 
ARCHIVESTNT ASTROCARE TODAY | MUSIC TODAY | ART TODAY | SYNDICATIONS TODAY