Issue of Afzal Guru

Mohammad Afzal Guru (died 9 February 2013) was convicted in the December 2001 attack on the Indian Parliament, and was sentenced to death by a special Prevention of Terrorism Act Court in 2002. The Delhi High Court confirmed the judgment in 2003 and his appeal was rejected by the Supreme Court of India in 2005.[2] The sentence was scheduled to be carried out on 20 October 2006, but Afzal was given a stay of execution and remained on death row. On 3 February 2013, his mercy petition was rejected by the President of India Pranab Mukherjee. He was hanged at Delhi’s Tihar Jail around 08:00 A.M. on February 9, 2013.

Early life

Guru was born in Aabgah village near Sopore town in Baramulla district of Jammu and Kashmir in 1969 to the family of Habibullah. [4][5] He completed his schooling from Government School, Sopore. He passed the Matriculation exam in 1986 and completed his higher secondary education in Sopore. He subsequently got enrolled in medical college. He had completed the first year of his MBBS course and was preparing for competitive exams.[6]


His native place is Sopore and he was doing a commission agency business. It was during this business venture that he came into contact with Tariq of Anantnag , who motivated him to join Jihad for liberation of Kashmir and assured him of financial assistance. He crossed the Line of Control and proceeded to Muzaffarabad in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir. He became a member of Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front where he received terrorist training in Pakistan.[6] After learning how to handle arms and ammunition, he returned to Sopore and led a group of nearly 300 militant terrorists. On a visit to Kashmir in 1998, he married a Baramulla native Tabassum. Unhappy with the situation in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, he moved back to Kashmir. He did odd jobs and completed his graduation from Delhi University in the year 1993-94. While studying he met Abdul Rehman Gilani, who was pursuing his post graduation course. In the summer of 1993-94 on the advice of his family, he surrendered to the Border Security Force and returned to Delhi where he worked till 1996.[4][6] He took up a job with a pharmaceuticals firm and served as its area manager. Simultaneously, he worked as a commission agent for medical and surgical goods in the year 1996. During this period, he used to shuttle between Srinagar and Delhi. It was his business that led to a meeting with one Tariq, who claimed to be a doctor. This resident of Anantnag convinced Afzal to aid some Pakistan-trained terrorists in their deadly mission.[5] Tariq introduced him to Ghazi Baba, who was equipped with wireless set and satellite phone. Even Ghazi Baba motivated him and gave him literature containing speeches of Maulana Masood Azhar. He agreed to work for them and was assigned the task of providing a safe hideout for the Fidayeens in Delhi.[4] He was apprised of the mission to carry out attacks on important institutions in India, like the Parliament and embassies, and asked to find a safe hideout for the terrorists in Delhi.[7] He has himself confirmed these in his own interviews with various newspapers.[8]

In an interview to news agencies, he had confessed to the same and said:[9]

“Yes, I first took training in Pakistan. I went to PoK (Pakistan Occupied Kashmir) in 1990. I stayed there for 15 days and took training from a Pakistan’s Army retired officer. I stayed in Kashmir for 20 days. There I saw the entire business. There was no freedom fight. There was no logic. There was lot of bloodshed. They were trying to earn money over there.”

The case

The attack was conducted jointly by the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) and the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM). Seven members of the security forces were killed, as were the five still incompletely identified men who carried out the attack.

Following were the charges against Afzal Guru:[4][2]

  • Waging, or attempting to wage war, or abetting waging of war, against the Government of India and Conspiracy to commit the same – Section 121 and 121A of the Indian Penal Code
  • Collecting arms, etc., with intention of waging war against the Government of India – Section 122 of the Indian Penal Code.
  • Criminal conspiracy to commit murder and attempt to commit murder – Section 120B read with Sections 302 & 307 of the Indian Penal Code
  • Conspiring to commit and knowingly facilitating the commission of a terrorist act or acts preparatory to terrorist act and also voluntarily harbouring and concealing the deceased terrorists knowing that such persons were terrorists and were the members of the Jaish-e-Mohammad, a banned terrorist organisation, which is involved in acts of terrorism; and hence committing an offence punishable under Section 3(3) (4) and (5) of Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002.
  • Possession of INR 10 Lakhs given to him by the terrorists who were killed by the police when they attacked the Parliament of India.

On 15 December 2001, Afzal was arrested by Delhi Police from from Jammu and Kashmir. SAR Geelani was picked up for questioning and was later arrested from Delhi. Two others – Afsan Guru and her husband Shaukat Hussain Guru — were picked up later. On 29 December 2001, Afzal was sent to 10-day police remand. In June 2002, charges were framed against all four of them.[10]. Eighty witnesses were examined for the prosecution and ten were examined for defense.


On 18 December 2002, a death sentence was given to Afzal Guru, S A R Geelani and Shaukat Hussain Guru, while Afsan Guru was let off. In August 2003, Jaish-e-Mohammed leader Ghazi Baba, who was a prime accused in the attack was killed in an encounter with the Border Security Force (BSF) in Srinagar. Three other militants, along with him were also killed in the 10-hour encounter. In October 2003, on an appeal, Delhi High Court upheld the order.

The judgment mentions:

“The gravity of the crime conceived by the conspirators with the potential of causing enormous casualties and dislocating the functioning of the Government as well as disrupting normal life of the people of India is something which cannot be described in words. The incident, which resulted in heavy casualties, has shaken the entire nation and the collective conscience of the society will be satisfied if the capital punishment is awarded to the offender.”[11]

On December 19 2001 he made a confession of the offenses, which was recorded and signed by him. He also confirmed having made the confessional statement without any threat or pressure.[12]

He was convicted for the offenses under Sections 121, 121A, 122, Section 120B read with Sections 302 & 307 read with Section 120B IPC, sub-Sections (2), (3) & (5) of Section 1, 3(4), 4(b)of POTA and Sections 3 & 4 of Explosive Substances Act. He was also sentenced to life imprisonment on as many as eight counts under the provisions of IPC, POTA and Explosive Substances Act in addition to varying amounts of fine.[13]

An appeal was made to the Delhi High Court, but after going through the case and taking into consideration various authorities and precedents, the Court found that the conviction of Afzal Guru was correct and hence his appeal was dismissed.[4] The co-accused in the case, S.A.R Geelani, was acquitted by the high court.[14][15]. Hence, although initially, the death penalty was meted out to S.A.R Geelani (who was presented as the mastermind behind the attack), Afzal Guru and Shaukat Hussain Guru, only Afzal Guru’s death penalty was upheld by the Supreme Court.[15]

In August 2005, Supreme Court, while confirming the death sentence of Afzal Guru, commuted Shaukat Hussain Guru’s death sentence to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment.[7] [10].

In October 2006, Afzal Guru’s wife Tabasum Guru filed a mercy petition with then President A. P. J. Abdul Kalam. In June 2007, Supreme Court dismissed Afzal’s plea seeking review of his death sentence, saying “there is no merit” in it. In December 2010, Shaukat Hussain Guru was released from Delhi’s Tihar Jail due to her good conduct.[10]

In its judgement, the Supreme Court observed:

“As criminal acts took place pursuant to the conspiracy, the appellant, as a party to the conspiracy, shall be deemed to have abetted the offence. In fact, he took active part in a series of steps taken to pursue the objective of conspiracy.”

Supreme Court of India, Judgement on Appeal by Afzal Guru on August 5 2005.[7][16]

The Supreme Court held that the circumstances detailed in the judgment clearly established that Afzal was associated with the deceased terrorists in almost every act done by them in order to achieve the objective of attacking the Parliament House. It also observed that there was sufficient and satisfactory circumstantial evidence to establish that Afzal was a partner in this conspired crime of enormous gravity. It has to be noted, that in its judgement of August 5, 2005, the supreme court admitted that the evidence against Afzal was only circumstantial, and that there was no evidence that he belonged to any terrorist group or organisation. He was subsequently meted out three life sentences and a double death sentence.[16]


The evidence against Afzal also included his confessional statement, which was recorded by the DCP, Special Cell. It was recorded in the preamble of the confession that DCP had asked the policemen present there to leave the room. After that he had warned and explained to Afzal that he was not bound to make the confessional statement and that if he did so, it could be used against him as evidence. Thereupon, it was recorded that Afzal was not under any duress and he was ready to give the confessional statement. The signature of Afzal was found beneath that endorsement.[16] The Supreme Court was angered by the act of police officials, who, in their over-zealousness, had arranged for a media interview.[16] However, after seven months, Afzal disowned this confession and the Supreme Court did not accept the earlier confession as an evidence against him.[16]

In the interview given to several media houses, he openly confessed that he was the person who brought the other four people involved in Parliament attack. He also said that he was asked to motivate Mohammad to achieve the target as soon as possible.But later it was revealed that these confessions were made under duress. This was the opinion of the senior Lawyer of the Supreme Court Ms Kamini Jaiswal who was representing him in the Supreme Court of India.[9]

Clemency pleas

There was an appeal to issue clemency to Afzal from various human rights groups including political groups in Kashmir, who believe that Afzal Guru did not receive a fair trial and was subjected to a frame up of corrupt and inefficient police work.[17] Human rights activists in various parts of India and the world have demanded reprieve as they believe that the trial was flawed. Arundhati Roy and Praful Bidwai castigated the trial and argued that Afzal has been denied natural justice.[18] Accusations of human rights violations have been made by many.

Former Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Mufti Mohammed Sayeed and local political groups voiced their support of clemency for Afzal. It was alleged many have done so to appease Muslim voters in India.[19] However there were protests (with instances of stone pelting at Indian security forces) in Kashmir against the planned execution of Afzal Guru in 2006.[20][21]

Communist Party of India (Marxist) was critical of both the Congress as well as of the BJP, and claimed it was delaying the legal procedure in the case accusing it of trying to whip up enmity between communities in the name of a crime done by a group of criminals. The party wants the law of the land to take its course without any interference.[22]

Ram Jethmalani held that it is completely within the President’s power to commute the Death sentence and is not a mercy plea. He said, “It’s a misnomer to call it a mercy petition. It leads to total misunderstanding of the constitutional power. The constitutional power is that the President has the power to disagree with the Supreme Court both with its findings of fact and law.”[23] The case became political and it was not carried out because of fear of revenge attacks. The Jammu and Kashmir People’s Democratic Party president and MP, Mehbooba Mufti commented that the Centre should pardon Afzal if Pakistan accepted the clemency appeal for Sarabjit Singh.[24] Mehbooba said that if clemency appeals were made for Sarabjit citing his Indian nationality, voices should also be raised for Afzal for “he too is an Indian citizen”. “Two citizens of India cannot be treated with different yardsticks” she had said.

However, the All-India Anti-Terrorist Front Chairman Maninderjeet Singh Bitta urged the President of India not to accept any clemency pleas on Afzal’s behalf. He warned that his organisation would launch agitations if Afzal was pardoned. He also criticised statements of various political leaders and blamed them for “encouraging activities of terrorists in Jammu and Kashmir”.[25]

An India Today poll in late October showed that 78% of Indians supported the death penalty for Afzal.[19]

On 12 November 2006, the former Deputy Prime Minister of India, Lal Krishna Advani criticized the delay in carrying out the death sentence on Guru for the Parliament terror attack, saying, “I fail to understand the delay. They have increased my security. But what needs to be done immediately is to carry out the court’s orders”.

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) severely criticized Arundhati Roy. BJP spokesperson Prakash Javadekar said:

“Those who are supporting Afzal by demanding that he should not be hanged are not only acting against public sentiment in the country but are giving a fillip to terrorist morale”[26]

On 23 June 2010, the Ministry of Home Affairs recommended the President’s office to reject the mercy petition. On 7 January 2011, a whistle-blowing site leaked a document which stated that the mercy petition file was not with President of India. This was rubbished by Kapil Sibal in a interview with NDTV.[27] This was confirmed by Home Minister P. Chidambaram in New Delhi on 23 Feb 2011. With the death penalty handed to Ajmal Kasab, the speculation was that Afzal Guru was next in line.[28]

On 10 August 2011, the home ministry of India rejected the mercy petition, and sent a letter to the President of India recommending the death penalty .[29]

On 7 September 2011, a high intensity bomb blast outside Delhi high court killed 11 people and left 76 others injured.[30] In an e-mail sent to a media house Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami, an Islamic fundamentalist organization, owned responsibility for the attack and claimed the blast was carried out in retaliation to Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru’s death sentence.

“We own the responsibility for today’s blasts at Delhi high court. Our demand is that Mohammed Afzal Guru’s death sentence should be repealed immediately else we would target major high courts and the Supreme Court of India.”[31]

On 16 November 2012, the President had sent back to the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) seven cases, including the one on Afzal Guru. The President wanted home minister Sushil Kumar Shinde to take a relook at the MHA opinion given during his predecessor P. Chidambaram’s tenure. On 10 December, Shinde said he will look at the file after the winter session of the Parliament concludes on December 20. [32] [33] On 3rd February 2013, his mercy petition was rejected by the President Of India.[3] Afzal Guru was hanged till death on 9th February 2013.[34]

Afzal Guru’s family was informed of his execution by a speed post letter which was delivered to their home in Sopore, two days after the execution. Postal officials in Srinagar stated that the letter was received on the evening of February 9 (Saturday), but could be delivered only on February 11 (Monday), because February 10 (Sunday) was a public holiday.[35]

Aftermath of Execution

Most political parties[36] with exception of Kashmiri politicians welcomed the move by the Government of India. The BJP stated that it was a correct move albeit very late. It also stated that the public opinion forced Afzal Guru’s hanging.[37] The Chief Minister of Jammu and kashmir had severely criticized government action and stated that ,it is for the first time in free India a person has been hanged on circumstancial evidence and his family members were not informed.

PDP (a Kashmiri political party) spokesman Naeem Akhtar also criticised Guru’s burial inside the prison complex in New Delhi, saying the body should have been given to his family in Kashmir. The All Parties Hurriyat Conference announced a four-day mourning on the death of Guru.The Tihar Jail authority had earlier said that his family members were informed about the hanging by Speed Post. The letter reached his widow two days after his death.

A curfew was imposed in Kashmir to prevent any kind of protests in support of Afzal Guru. However protests flared up in parts of the Valley and groups of young men defied curfew and stoned security forces in Sopore, Guru’s hometown, Baramulla in North Kashmir and Pulwama in South Kashmir and certain other areas.[38] Thirty-six people including 23 policemen were injured in protests, said police spokesman Manoj Sheeri, with most of the violence in Guru’s home district. Authorities shut down internet services to try to stop news of the hanging and unrest spreading. The chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir state, Omar Abdullah, made a televised appeal for calm.[39][20]

S.A.R. Geelani, a co-accused in the attacks on the Indian parliament, who was later acquitted by the Supreme Court in the absence of sufficient evidence[40] was taken into preventive custody by the Delhi Police.[41] He told media persons, that Afzal Guru’s hanging was a politically motivated gimmick and an example of vote bank politics.[42][42]. Justice SN Dhinga, the Judge who sentenced Guru and co-accused Shaukat Guru and SAR Geelani to death in 2002, termed the execution a political move stating that the judiciary took just three years to decide the matter while the executive took eight years to implement the same[43]

Omar Abdullah’s father, Former Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, Union minister Farooq Abdullah said: “Afzal Guru’s mercy petition was put before the President. He rejected it. The matter is over.”[44]

Reaction of the Press

Although the Press in India has been supportive of Afzal Guru’s hanging, a section of the press raised apprehension on the manner in which the execution was carried out. In particular, the Times of India pointed out that since assumption of office as President Pranab Mukherjee turned down three clemency petitions – Ajmal Amir Kasab, Afzal Guru and Saibanna Ningappa Natekar.[45] According to Zee News website when Pranab Mukherjee on January 4, 2013 rejected the clemency of Saibanna Ningappa Natekar, sentenced to death for murdering his two wives and a daughter, the latter moved to Karnataka High Court praying that his mercy petition which was pending with the President April 29, 2005 as “the avoidable delay in deciding mercy petition is extra punishment and is not mandatory as there is a delay of seven years, eight months and six days in deciding the plea. Execution of death sentence, after a delay of seven years is whimsical, arbitrary, capricious and violation of Article 14.” He also termed it as violation of Article 21 of the Constitution. Karnataka High Court initially granted one week stay on the execution of Saibanna on January 22, 2012 which was subsequently extended to February 11, 2012 [46] It may be noted that article 14 of the Indian constitution grants equality before law to all citizens [47] while Article 21 grants Protection of life and Personal Liberty.[48] Further, according to Times of India,after Kehar Singh‘s execution in the Indira Gandhi case, Guru was the only conspirator to have ever been hanged in connection with any high-profile crime. The three conspirators in the Rajiv Gandhi case, although awarded death penalty earlier than Guru, have so far been spared the noose because of a stay from the Madras High Court on their execution. The stay came in 2011 on their plea that the death penalty be commuted to life sentence as the President had rejected their mercy petitions after an “inordinate and unexplained” delay. A major point highlighted by Times of India is the dilution of the due process evident from the government’s failure to comply with the stipulation of the jail manual to inform Guru’s family about the date of the execution. The compromise is more evident in Guru’s case because, unlike Kasab, his family members are Indians, who live in Kashmir. The rationale behind this stipulation is to provide the convict a chance to meet his family members for the last time.[45]

Home Minister’s Statement

Indian Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde said that Afzal Guru’s family was informed about the hanging decision on time. He defended the secrecy government maintained in the execution saying that it would not have happened had the decision been made public in advance.[49] He also deniend the Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah’s charge that he was kept in the dark about the Centre’s decision to hang him. He said: ““I personally informed Omar about the execution. Also, the family of Afzal Guru was informed on the night of February 07.”. Asserting the need to maintain secrecy, Shinde said, “This, as Ajmal Kasab’s case, was extremely sensitive, government had to be very careful. Secrecy has to be maintained in such cases.”[50] He also picked holes in Omar Abdullah’s assertion that Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru’s hanging was “out of turn.”[44]

Roll of CAG Comptroller and Auditor General of India

Audit Jurisdiction

The organisations subject to the audit of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India are:-


  • All the Union and State Government departments and offices including the Indian Railways and Posts and Telecommunications.
  • About 1500 public commercial enterprises controlled by the Union and State governments, i.e. government companies and corporations.
  • Around 400 non-commercial autonomous bodies and authorities owned or controlled by the Union or the States.
  • Over 4400 authorities and bodies substantially financed from Union or State revenues

Audit of Government Companies (Commercial Audit)

There is a special arrangement for the audit of companies where the equity participation by Government is 51 percent or more. The primary auditors of these companies are Chartered Accountants, appointed by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India, who gives the directions to the auditors on the manner in which the audit should be conducted by them. The Comptroller and Auditor General of India is also empowered to comment upon the audit reports of the primary auditors. In addition, the Comptroller and Auditor General of India conducts a test audit of the accounts of such companies and reports the results of his audit to Parliament and State Legislatures.

Audit Board Setup in Commercial Audit

A unique feature of the audit conducted by the Indian Audit and Accounts Department is the constitution of Audit Boards for conducting comprehensive audit appraisals of the working of Public Sector Enterprises engaged in diverse sectors of the economy. 

These Audit Boards associate with them experts in disciplines relevant to the appraisals. They discuss their findings and conclusions with the managements of the enterprises and their controlling ministries and departments of government to ascertain their view points before finalisation. 

The results of such comprehensive appraisals are incorporated by the Comptroller and Auditor General in his reports

Nature of Audit

While fulfilling his Constitutional obligations, the Comptroller & Auditor General examines various aspects of Government expenditure. The audit done by C&A G is broadly classified into Regularity Audit and Performance Audit.

Regularity Audit (Compliance)

  • Audit against provision of funds to ascertain whether the moneys shown as expenditure in the Accounts were authorised for the purpose for which they were spent.
  • Audit against rules and regulation to see that the expenditure incurred was in conformity with the laws, rules and regulations framed to regulate the procedure for expending public money.
  • Audit of sanctions to expenditure to see that every item of expenditure was done with the approval of the competent authority in the Government for expending the public money.
  • Propriety Audit which extends beyond scrutinising the mere formality of expenditure to it wisdom and economy and to bring to light cases of improper expenditure or waste of public money.
  • While conducting the audit of receipts of the Central and State Governments, the Comptroller & Auditor General satisfies himself that the rules and procedures ensure that assessment, collection and allocation of revenue are done in accordance with the law and there is no leakage of revenue which legally should come to Government.

Performance Audit

Performance audit to see that Government programmes have achieved the desired objectives at lowest cost and given the intended benefits. For a complete list of Performance Appraisals since 1983 

Regularity Audit (Financial)

In regularity (financial) audit and in other types of audit when applicable, auditors should  analyse the financial statements to establish whether acceptable accounting    standards for financial reporting and disclosure are complied with. Analysis of financial statements should be performed to such a degree that a rational basis is obtained to express an opinion on financial statements.

Action on Audit Reports

 The scrutiny of the Annual Accounts and the Audit Reports thereon by the Parliament as a whole would be an arduous task, considering their diverse and specialised nature, besides imposing excessive demands on the limited time available to the Parliament for discussion of issues of national importance. Therefore the Parliament and the State Legislatures have, for this purpose, constituted specialized Committees like the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) and the Committee on Public Undertakings (COPU), to which these audit Reports and Annual Accounts automatically stand referred.

Public Accounts Committee

The Public Accounts Committee satisfies itself:-

 a.that the moneys (shown in the accounts) were disbursed legally on the service or     purpose to which they were applied.

 b.that the expenditure was authorised.

 c.that re-appropriation (i.e. distribution of funds.

It is also the duty of the PAC to examine the statement of accounts of autonomous and semi-autonomous bodies, the audit of which is conducted by the Comptroller & Auditor General either under the directions of the President or by a Statute of Parliament.

Committee on Public Undertakings

The Committee on Public Undertakings exercises the same financial control on the public sector undertakings as the Public Accounts Committee exercises over the functioning of the Government Departments. The functions of the Committee are:- examine the reports and accounts of public undertakings. examine the reports of the Comptroller & Auditor General on public undertakings. examine the efficiency of public undertakings and to see whether they are being     managed in accordance with sound business principles and prudent commercial practices. 

The examination of public enterprises by the Committee takes the form of comprehensive appraisal or evaluation of performance of the undertaking. It involves a thorough examination,including evaluation of the policies, programmes and financial working of the undertaking.

The objective of the Financial Committees, in doing so, is not to focus only on the individual irregularity, but on the defects in the system which led to such irregularity, and the need for correction of such systems and procedures.

CAG’s Role

The Comptroller & Auditor General of India plays a key role in the functioning of the financial committees of Parliament and the State Legislatures. He has come to be recognised as a ‘friend, philosopher and guide’ of the Committee. His Reports generally form the basis of the Committees’ working, although they are not precluded from examining issues not brought out in his Reports. He scrutinises the notes which the Ministries submit to the Committees and helps the Committees to check the correctness submit to the Committees and helps the Committees to check the correctness of facts and figures in their draft reports.

The Financial Committees present their Report to the Parliament/ State Legislature with their observations and recommendations. The various Ministries / Department of the Government are required to inform the Committees of the action taken by them on the recommendations of the Committees (which are generally accepted) and the Committees present Action Taken Reports to Parliament / Legislature.

In respect of those cases in Audit Reports, which could not be discussed in detail by the Committees, written answers are obtained from the Department / Ministry concerned and are sometimes incorporated in the Reports presented to the Parliament / State Legislature. This ensures that the audit Reports are not taken lightly by the Government, even if the entire report is not deliberated upon by the Committee.


The Union Audit Reports of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India, contain the findings of transaction audit and performance audit in the areas of:

  • Civil Audit
  • Audit of Autonomous Bodies
  • Defense Services
  • Railways
  • Receipts of the Government
  • Central Commercial

The Audit of the CAG is bifurcated into two streams namely Performance Audit and Regularity (Compliance) Audit.


While audit of the Civil Departments, Railways and Defense are conducted as per the direct mandate in the constitution and relevant provisions of the DPC Act, the Commercial Audit is conducted under the provisions of Company Act. Autonomous Bodies are audited as per the mandate in the act establishing the body.


The reports of the CAG are deliberated upon by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the parliament, save the commercial reports which are examined by the Committee on Public Undertakings (COPU).

What is National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC)

About the National Counterterrorism Center

Liberty Crossing The National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) was established by Presidential Executive Order 13354 in August 2004, and codified by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (IRTPA). NCTC implements a key recommendation of the 9/11 Commission: “Breaking the older mold of national government organizations, this NCTC should be a center for joint operational planning and joint intelligence, staffed by personnel from the various agencies.”1 See Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, at p. 403.

The Director of NCTC is a Deputy Secretary-equivalent with a unique, dual line of reporting: (1) to the President regarding Executive branch-wide counterterrorism planning, and (2) to the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) regarding intelligence matters. NCTC follows the policy direction of the President, and National and Homeland Security Councils.

NCTC is staffed by more than 500 personnel from more than 16 departments and agencies (approximately 60 percent of whom are detailed to NCTC). NCTC is organizationally part of the ODNI.

NCTC’s core missions are derived primarily from IRTPA, as supplemented by other statutes, Executive Orders, and Intelligence Community Directives.2 NCTC’s mission statement succinctly summarizes its key responsibilities and value-added contributions: “Lead our nation’s effort to combat terrorism at home and abroad by analyzing the threat, sharing that information with our partners, and integrating all instruments of national power to ensure unity of effort.”

“Analyzing the Threat”
By law, NCTC serves as the primary organization in the United States Government (USG) for integrating and analyzing all intelligence pertaining to counterterrorism (except for information pertaining exclusively to domestic terrorism).

NCTC integrates foreign and domestic analysis from across the Intelligence Community (IC) and produces a wide-range of detailed assessments designed to support senior policymakers and other members of the policy, intelligence, law enforcement, defense, homeland security, and foreign affairs communities. Prime examples of NCTC analytic products include items for the President’s Daily Brief (PDB) and the daily National Terrorism Bulletin (NTB). NCTC is also the central player in the ODNI’s Homeland Threat Task Force, which orchestrates interagency collaboration and keeps senior policymakers informed about threats to the Homeland via a weekly update.

NCTC leads the IC in providing expertise and analysis of key terrorism-related issues, with immediate and far-reaching impact. For example, NCTC’s Radicalization and Extremist Messaging Group leads the IC’s efforts on radicalization issues. NCTC’s Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear Counterterrorism Group pools scarce analytical, subject matter, and scientific expertise from NCTC and CIA on these critical issues.

NCTC also evaluates the quality of CT analytic production, the training of analysts working CT, and the strengths and weaknesses of the CT analytic workforce. NCTC created the Analytic Framework for Counterterrorism, aimed at reducing redundancy of effort by delineating the roles of the IC’s various CT analytic components. NCTC also created a working group for alternative analysis to help improve the overall rigor and quality of CT analysis.

“Sharing that Information”
By law, NCTC serves as the USG’s central and shared knowledge bank on known and suspected terrorists and international terror groups. NCTC also provides USG agencies with the terrorism intelligence analysis and other information they need to fulfill their missions. NCTC collocates more than 30 intelligence, military, law enforcement and homeland security networks under one roof to facilitate robust information sharing. NCTC is a model of interagency information sharing.

Through the Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment (TIDE), NCTC maintains a consolidated repository of information on international terrorist identities and provides the authoritative database supporting the Terrorist Screening Center and the USG’s watchlisting system. The Center also produces NCTC Online (NOL) and NCTC Online CURRENT, classified websites that make CT products and articles available to users across approximately 75 USG agencies, departments, military services and major commands. NCTC’s Interagency Threat Assessment and Coordination Group (ITACG) facilitates information sharing between the IC and State, Local, Tribal, and Private partners – in coordination with DHS, FBI, and other members of the ITACG Advisory Council.

NCTC also provides the CT community with 24/7 situational awareness, terrorism threat reporting, and incident information tracking. NCTC hosts three daily secure video teleconferences (SVTC) and maintains constant voice and electronic contact with major Intelligence and CT Community players and foreign partners.

“Integrating All Instruments of National Power”
By law, NCTC conducts strategic operational planning for CT activities across the USG, integrating all instruments of national power, including diplomatic, financial, military, intelligence, homeland security, and law enforcement to ensure unity of effort. NCTC ensures effective integration of CT plans and synchronization of operations across more than 20 government departments and agencies engaged in the War on Terror, through a single and truly joint planning process.

NCTC’s planning efforts include broad, strategic plans such as the landmark National Implementation Plan for the War on Terror (NIP). First approved by the President in June 2006 and then again in September 2008, the NIP is the USG’s comprehensive and evolving strategic plan to implement national CT priorities into concerted interagency action.

NCTC also prepares far more granular, targeted action plans to ensure integration, coordination, and synchronization on key issues, such as countering violent extremism, terrorist use of the internet, terrorist use of weapons of mass destruction, and counter-options (after an attack). NCTC also leads Interagency Task Forces designed to analyze, monitor, and disrupt potential terrorist attacks.

NCTC assigns roles and responsibilities to departments and agencies as part of its strategic planning duties, but NCTC does not direct the execution of any resulting operations.

NCTC monitors the alignment of all CT resources against the NIP and provides advice and recommendations to policy officials to enhance mission success.

The Director of NCTC is also the CT Mission Manager for the IC, per DNI directive3. Thus implementing a key recommendation of the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction. In that role, NCTC leads the CT community in identifying critical intelligence problems, key knowledge gaps, and major resource constraints. NCTC also created the CT Intelligence Plan (CTIP) to translate the NIP and the National Intelligence Strategy into a common set of priority activities for the IC, and to establish procedures for assessing how the IC is performing against those objectives.

NCTC, in partnership with NSC and HSC, is leading reform of CT policy architecture to streamline policymaking and clarify missions.

Democracy in India

A Look into the Work of the People’s Governments in Dandakaranya Special Zone

Parliamentary democracy in India is much hailed. India is said to be the biggest democracy in the world. This democracy is known to be ‘ for the people, by the people and of the people’. The past more than half a century proved this democracy to be sham. People of India and all over the world are vexed with the ineffectiveness and misappropriation of the ‘democratic institutions’ like the court, police, jail and the administrative machinery. Essential services like water and electricity are a point of agitation in many parts of the country almost every day.

And it is inaccessible to the adivasi population who constitute one important section of the population of the country. The presence of the parliamentary democratic institutions and minimum medical services are not seen in most of the adivasi areas of the country. It is true that the people in these areas were at a loss, away from the ‘modern’ world.

But for the past few years, things took a different turn in some parts of the adivasi areas. While the North Eastern states and some other areas are fighting for the liberation of their nationalities from the domination of the Indian state, the adivasis of the central part of the country and a few other eastern states sought a different alternative. They started forming a people’s government of their own.

‘People’s democracy’ found birth in the most ‘backward’, ‘uncivilized’ areas of the country. It continued to develop in divergent ways and levels. The achievements of this people’s democracy prove that this is a real kind of democracy, a democracy of the people, by the people and for the people in its actual sense. The main principles of this democracy are collective functioning and democratic centralism, the Maoist principles.

The people’s democracy named ‘janathana sarkar’ (people’s government) in the Dandakaranyam Special Zone of the state of Chathisgarh under the leadership of the Communist Party of India (Maoist) is the ‘embryonic stage’ of people’s power to be achieved countrywide in future, as put by the party. The activities in production, cultural, educational and military sectors of the present janathana sarkars, give an outline of the future socialist state. It also reveals that despite the severe repression campaign of the parliamentary state, the janathana sarkars are going to succeed. The party has succeeded in consolidating the people’s government to a certain stage and is heading towards forming higher levels of the same.

Jan Lokpal Bill

Jan Lokpal Bill version 1.8
An act to create effective anti-corruption and grievance redressal systems at centre so that effective
deterrent is created against corruption and to provide effective protection to whistleblowers.
1. Short title and commencement:- (1) This Act may be called the Anti-Corruption, Grievance
Redressal And Whistleblower Protection Act, 2010.
(2) It shall come into force on the one hundred and twentieth day of its enactment.
2. Definitions:- In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,-
(1) “Action” means any action taken by a public servant in the discharge of his functions as such public
servant and includes decision, recommendation or finding or in any other manner and includes
willful failure or omission to act and all other expressions relating to such action shall be construed
(2) “Allegation” in relation to a public servant includes any affirmation that such public servant-
(a) has indulged in misconduct, if he is a government servant;
(b) has indulged in corruption
(3) “complaint” includes any grievance or allegation or a request by whistleblower for protection and
appropriate action.
(4) “corruption” includes anything made punishable under Chapter IX of the Indian Penal Code or
under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988;
Provided that if any person obtains any benefit from the government by violating any laws or rules,
that person along with the public servants who directly or indirectly helped that person obtain
those benefits, shall be deemed to have indulged in corruption.
(5) “Government” or “Central Government” means Government of India.
(6) “Government Servant” means any person who is or was any time appointed to a civil service or post
in connection with the affairs of the Central Government or High Courts or Supreme Court either on
deputation or permanent or temporary or on contractual employment but would not include the
(7) “grievance” means a claim by a person that he sustained injustice or undue hardship in
consequence of mal-administration;
(8) “Lokpal” means
a. Benches constituted under this Act and performing their functions as laid down under
various provisions of this Act; or
b. Any officer or employee, exercising its powers and carrying out its functions and
responsibilities, in the manner and to the extent, assigned to it under this Act, or under
various rules, regulations or orders made under various provisions of this Act.
c. For all other purposes, the Chairperson and members acting collectively as a body;
(9) “Mal-administration” means action taken or purporting to have been taken in the exercise of
administrative function in any case where,-
a. such action or the administrative procedure or practice governing such action is
unreasonable, unjust, oppressive or improperly discriminatory; or
b. there has been willful negligence or undue delay in taking such action or the administrative
procedure or practice governing such action involves undue delay;
(10) “Misconduct” means misconduct as defined in CCS Conduct Rules and which has vigilance angle.
(11) “public authority” means any authority or body or institution of self- government established or
a. by or under the Constitution;
b. by any other law made by Parliament;
c. by notification issued or order made by the Government, and includes any body owned,
controlled or substantially financed by the Government;
(12) “Public servant” means a person who is or was at any time,-
(a) the Prime Minister;
(b) a Minister;
(c) a Member of Parliament;
(d) Judges of High Courts and Supreme Court;
(e) a Government servant;
(f) the Chairman or Vice-Chairman (by whatever name called) or a member of a local
authority in the control of the Central Government or a statutory body or corporation
established by or under any law of the Parliament of India, including a co-operative
society, or a Government Company within the meaning of section 617 of the
Companies Act, 1956 and members of any Committee or Board, statutory or nonstatutory,
constituted by the Government;
(g) Such other authorities as the Central Government may, by notification, from time to
time, specify;
(13) “Vigilance angle” includes –
(a) All acts of corruption
(b) Gross or willful negligence; recklessness in decision making; blatant violations of systems and
procedures; exercise of discretion in excess, where no ostensible/public interest is evident;
failure to keep the controlling authority/superiors informed in time
(c) Failure/delay in taking action, if under law the government servant ought to do so, against
subordinates on complaints of corruption or dereliction of duties or abuse of office by the
(d) Indulging in discrimination through one’s conduct, directly or indirectly.
(e) Victimizing Whistle Blowers
(f) Any undue/unjustified delay in the disposal of a case, perceived after considering all relevant
factors, would reinforce a conclusion as to the presence of vigilance angle in a case.
(g) Make unfair investigation or enquiry to either unduly help culprits or fabricate the innocent.
(h) Any other matter as notified from time to time by Lokpal
(14) “Whistleblower” is any person who faces threat of (1) professional harm, including but not limited
to illegitimate transfers, denial of promotions, denial of appropriate perks, departmental
proceedings, discrimination or (2) physical harm or (3) is actually subjected to such harm; because
of either making a complaint to Lokpal under this Act or for filing an application under Right to
Information Act.
3. Establishment of the institution of Lokpal and appointment of Lokpal:
(1) There shall be an institution known as Lokpal which shall consist of one Chairperson and ten
members along with its officers and employees. The Lokpal shall be headed by its Chairperson.
(2) The Chairperson and members of Lokpal shall be selected in such manner as laid down in this
(3) A person appointed as Chairperson or member of Lokpal shall, before entering upon his office,
make and subscribe before the President, an oath or affirmation in the form as prescribed.
(4) The Government shall appoint the Chairperson and members of the first Lokpal and set up the
institution with all its logistics and assets within six months of enactment of this Act.
(5) The Government shall fill up a vacancy of the Chairperson or a member caused due to
a) Retirement, 3 months before the member or the Chairperson retires.
b) Any other unforeseen reason, within a month of such vacancy.
Chairperson and Members of Lokpal
4. The Chairperson and members of Lokpal not to have held certain offices- The Chairperson and
members of Lokpal shall not be serving or former member of either the Parliament or the Legislature of
any State and shall not hold any office or trust of profit (other than the office as Chairperson or
member) or would have ever been connected with any political party or carry on any business or
practice any profession and accordingly, before he enters upon his office, a person appointed as the
Chairperson or member of Lokpal shall-
(i) if he holds any office of trust or profit, resign from such office; or
(ii) if he is carrying on any business, sever his connection with the conduct and
management of such business; or
(iii) if he is practicing any profession, suspend practice of such profession.
(iv) If he is associated directly or indirectly with any other activity, which is likely cause
conflict of interest in the performance of his duties in Lokpal, he should suspend his
association with that activity.
Provided that if even after the suspension, the earlier association of that person with
such activity is likely to adversely affect his performance at Lokpal, that person shall
not be appointed as a member or Chairperson of Lokpal.
5. Term of office and other conditions of service of Lokpal– (1) A person appointed as the Chairperson
or member of Lokpal shall hold office for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his
Provided further that.-
(a) the Chairperson or member of Lokpal may, by writing under his hand addressed to the
President, resign his office;
(b) the Chairperson or member may be removed from office in the manner provided in
this Act.
(2) There shall be paid to the Chairperson and each member every month a salary equal to that of the
Chief Justice of India and that of the judge of the Supreme Court respectively;
(3) The allowances and pension payable to and other conditions of service of the Chairperson or a
member shall be such as may be prescribed;
Provided that the allowances and pension payable to and other conditions of service of the
Chairperson or members shall not be varied to his disadvantage after his appointment.
(4) The administrative expenses of the office of the Lokpal including all salaries, allowances and pensions
payable to or in respect of persons serving in that office, shall be charged on the Consolidated Fund of
(5) There shall be a separate fund by the name of “Lokpal fund” in which penalties/fines imposed by the
Lokpal shall be deposited and in which 10% of the loss of Public Money detected/prevented on account
of investigations by Lokpal shall also be deposited by the Government. Disposal of such fund shall be
completely at the discretion of the Lokpal and such fund shall be used only for
enhancement/upgradation/extension of the infrastructure of Lokpal.
(6) The Chairperson or members shall not be eligible for appointment on any position in Government of
India or Government of any state or for fighting elections, if he has ever held the position of the
Chairperson or a member for any period.
Provided however that a member or Chairperson may be reappointed for one more term or a member
may be appointed as the Chairperson, however, that any person shall not serve for more than a total of
two terms.
6. Appointment of the Chairperson and members:
1. The Chairperson and members shall be appointed by the President on the recommendation of a
selection committee.
2. Following persons shall not be eligible to become Chairman or Member in Lokpal:
(a) Any person who was ever chargesheeted for any offence under IPC or PC Act or was ever
penalized under CCS Conduct Rules.
(b) Any person who is less than 40 years in age.
3. At least four members of Lokpal shall have legal background.
4. The members and Chairperson should have unimpeachable integrity and should have
demonstrated their resolve and efforts to fight against corruption in the past.
5. A selection committee consisting of the following shall be set up:
a. The Chairpersons of both Houses of Parliament
b. Two senior most judges of Supreme Court
c. Two senior most Chief Justices of High Courts.
d. All Nobel Laureates of Indian Origin
e. Chairperson of National Human Rights Commission
f. Last two Magsaysay Award winners of Indian origin
g. Comptroller and Auditor General of India
h. Chief Election Commissioner
i. Bharat Ratna Award winners
j. After the first set of selection process, the outgoing members and Chairperson of
6. The seniormost judge of Supreme Court shall act as the Chairperson of the selection committee.
7. The following selection process shall be followed:
a. Recommendations shall be invited through open advertisements in prescribed format.
b. Each person recommending shall be expected to justify the selection of his candidate
giving examples from the past achievements of the candidate.
c. The list of candidates along with their recommendations received in the format
mentioned above shall be displayed on a website.
d. Each member of the selection committee, on the basis of the above material, shall
recommend such number of names as there are vacancies.
e. A priority list shall be prepared with the candidate receiving recommendations from
maximum number of members of selection committee at the top. The candidates
recommended by same number of members shall be treated at par.
f. This priority list shall be displayed on the website.
g. Around three times the names as there are vacancies, shall be shortlisted from the top.
h. Public feedback shall be invited on the shortlisted names by putting these names on the
i. The selection committee may decide to use any means to collect more information
about the background and past achievements of the shortlisted candidates.
j. Selection committee shall invite shortlisted candidates for discussions, video recordings
of which shall be made public.
k. All the material obtained so far about the candidates shall be made available to each
member of the selection committee in advance. The members shall make their own
assessment of each candidate.
l. The selection committee shall meet and discuss the material so received about each
candidate. The final selections for the Chairperson and members shall be made
preferably through consensus.
Provided that if three or more members, for reasons to be recorded in writing, object to
the selection of any member, he shall not be selected.
m. All meetings of selection committee shall be video recorded and shall be made public.
8. The Prime Minister shall recommend the names finalized by the selection committee to the
President immediately, who shall order such appointments within a month of receipt of the
9. If any of the members of the selection committee retires while a selection process is going on,
that member will continue on the selection committee till the end of that process.
7. Removal of Chairperson or members-
(1) The Chairperson or any member shall not be removed from his office except by an order of the
(2) They can be removed on one or more of the following grounds:
a. Proved misbehavior
b. Professional or physical incapacity
c. If he is adjudged to be insolvent
d. Has been charged of an offence which involves moral turpitude
e. If he engages during his term of office in any paid employment outside the duties of his
f. Has acquired such financial interests or other interests which are likely to affect
prejudicially his functions as member or Chairperson.
g. If he is guided by considerations extraneous to the merits of the case either to favor
someone or to implicate someone through any act of omission or commission.
h. If any member or Chairperson tries to or actually unduly influences any government
i. If he commits any act of omission or commission which is punishable under Prevention
of Corruption Act or is a misconduct.
j. If a member or the Chairperson in any way, concerned or interested in any contract or
agreement made by or on behalf of the Government of India or participates in any way
in the profit thereof or in any benefit or emolument arising there from otherwise than
as a member and in common with the other members of an incorporated company, he
shall be deemed to be guilty of misbehavior.
(3) The following process shall be followed for the removal of any member or Chairperson:
(a) Any person may move an application/petition before the Supreme Court seeking removal of
one or more of the members of Chairperson of Lokpal alleging one or more of the grounds for removal
and providing evidence for the same.
(b) Supreme Court will hear the matter by a bench of three or more Judges on receipt of such
petition and may take one or more of the following steps:
(i) order an investigation to be done by a Special Investigation Team appointed by the
Supreme Court if a prima facie case is made out and if the matter cannot be judged based on
affidavits of the parties. The Special Investigation Team shall submit its report within three
(ii) Pending investigations under sub-clause (i) by Special Investigation Team, the
Supreme Court may decide to order withdrawal of part or complete work from that member.
(iii) dismiss the petition if no case is made out
(iv) if the grounds are proved, recommend to the President for removal of the said
member or Chairperson
(v) direct registration and investigation of cases with appropriate agencies if there is
prima facie case of commission of an offence punishable under Prevention of Corruption
(c) The three judge bench shall be constituted by a panel of five seniormost judges of the
Supreme Court.
Provided that if there are any proceedings going on against any judge in Lokpal, he shall not
be a part of either the panel or the bench.
(d) The Supreme Court shall not dismiss such petitions in liminae.
(e) If the Supreme Court concludes that the petition has been made with mischievous or
malafide motives, the Court may order imposition of fine or imprisonment upto one year
against the complainant.
(f) On receipt of a recommendation from the Supreme Court under this section, the Prime
Minister shall recommend it to the President immediately and the President shall order
removal of said members within a month of receipt of the same.
Powers and Functions of Lokpal
8. Functions of Lokpal: (1) Lokpal shall be responsible for receiving:
(a) Complaints where there are allegations of such acts of omission or commission which are
punishable under Prevention of Corruption Act
(b) Complaints where there are allegations of misconduct by a government servant
(c) Grievances
(d) Complaints from whistleblowers
(2) Lokpal, after getting such enquiries and investigations done as it deems fit, may take one or more of
the following actions:
a. Close the case if prima facie, the complaint is not made out or
b. Initiate prosecution against public servants as well as those private entities which
are party to the act
c. Order imposition of appropriate penalties under CCS Conduct Rules
Provided that if an officer is finally convicted under Prevention of Corruption
Act, major penalty of dismissal shall be imposed on such government servant.
d. Order cancellation or modification of a license or lease or permission or contract or
agreement, which was the subject matter of investigation.
e. Blacklist the concerned firm or company or contractor or any other entity involved
in that act of corruption.
f. Issue appropriate directions to appropriate authorities for redressal of grievance in
such time and in such manner as is specified in the order.
g. Invoke its powers under this Act if its orders are not duly complied with and ensure
due compliance of its orders.
h. Take necessary action to provide protection to a whistleblower as per various
provisions of this Act.
(3) Suo moto initiate appropriate action under this Act if any case, of the nature mentioned in clauses
(1), (2), (3) or (4), comes to the knowledge of the Lokpal from any source.
(4) Issue such directions, as are necessary, from time to time, to appropriate authorities so as to make
such changes in their work practices, administration or other systems so as to reduce the scope and
possibility for corruption, misconduct and public grievances.
(5) Lokpal shall be deemed to be “Disciplinary authority” or “appointing authority” for the purpose of
imposing penalties under CCS Conduct Rules.
(6) Section 19 of Prevention of Corruption Act shall be deleted.
(7) Section 197 of CrPC shall not apply to any proceedings under this Act. All permissions, which need to
be sought for initiating investigations or for initiating prosecutions under any Act shall be deemed to
have been granted once Lokpal grants such permissions.
9. Issue of Search Warrant, etc.- (1) Where, in consequence of information in his possession, the Lokpal
(a) has reason to believe that any person. –
(i) to whom a summon or notice under this Act, has, been or might be issued,
will not or would not produce or cause to be produced any property, document
or thing which will be necessary or useful for or relevant to any inquiry or other
proceeding to be conducted by him;
(ii) is in possession of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or
thing and such money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing
represents either wholly or partly income or property which has not been
disclosed to the authorities for the purpose of any law or rule in force which
requires such disclosure to be made; or
(b) considers that the purposes of any inquiry or other proceedings to be conducted by him will
be served by a general search or inspection,
he may by a search warrant authorize any Police officer not below the rank of an Inspector of Police to
conduct a search or carry out an inspection in accordance therewith and in particular to, –
(i) enter and search any building or place where he has reason to suspect that such property,
document, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing is kept;
(ii) search any person who is reasonably suspected of concealing about his person any article
for which search should be made;
(iii) break open the lock of any door, box, locker safe, almirah or other receptacle for
exercising the powers conferred by sub-clause (i) where the keys thereof are not available.
Seize any such property, document, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing
found as a result of such search;
(iv) place marks of identification on any property or document or make or cause to be made;
extracts or copies therefrom; or
(v) make a note or an inventory of any such property, document, money, bullion, Jewellery or
other valuable article or thing.
(2) The provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, relating to search and seizure shall apply, so
far as may be, to searches and seizures under sub-section (1).
(3) A warrant issued under sub-section (1) shall for all purposes, be deemed to be a warrant issued by a
court under section 93 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
10. Evidence – (1) Subject to the provisions of this section, for the purpose of any investigation (including
the preliminary inquiry, if any, before such investigation) under this Act, the Lokpal may require any
public servant or any other person who, in his opinion is able to furnish information or produce
documents relevant to the investigation, to furnish any such information or produce any such
(2) For the purpose of any such investigation (including the preliminary inquiry) the Lokpal shall
have all the powers of a civil court while trying a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 , in respect
of the following matters, namely:-
(a) Summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath;
(b) Requiring the discovery and production of any document;
(c) Receiving evidence on affidavits;
(d) Requisitioning any public record or copy thereof from any court or office ;
(e) Issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses or documents ;
(f) ordering payment of compensatory cost in respect of a false or vexatious claim or
(g) ordering cost for causing delay;
(h) Such other matters as may be prescribed.
(3) Any proceeding before the Lokpal shall be deemed to be a judicial proceeding with in the
meaning of section 193 of the Indian Penal Code.
11. Reports of Lokpal, etc. (1) The Chairperson of Lokpal shall present annually a consolidated report in
prescribed format on its performance to the President.
(2) On receipt of the annual report, the President shall cause a copy thereof together with an
explanatory memorandum to be laid before each House of the Parliament.
(3) The Lokpal shall publish every month on its website the list of cases disposed with brief details of
each such case, outcome and action taken or proposed to be taken in that case. It shall also publish lists
of all cases received by the Lokpal during the previous month, cases disposed and cases which are
12. Lokpal to be a deemed police officer: (1) For the purposes of section 36 of Criminal Procedure Code,
the Chairperson, members of Lokpal and the officers in investigation wing of Lokpal shall be deemed to
be police officers.
(2) While investigating any offence under Prevention of Corruption Act 1988, they shall be competent to
investigate any offence under any other law in the same case.
13. Powers in case of non-compliance of orders: (1) Each order of Lokpal shall clearly specify the names
of the officials who are required to execute that order, the manner in which it should be executed and
the time period within which that order should be complied with.
(2) If the order is not complied with within the time or in the manner directed, Lokpal may decide to
impose a fine on the officials responsible for the non-compliance of its orders.
(3) The Drawing and Disbursing Officer of that Department shall be directed to deduct such amount of
fine as is clearly specified by the Lokpal in its order made in sub-section (2) from the salaries of the
officers specified in the order.
Provided that no penalty shall be imposed without giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Provided that if the Drawing and Disbursing Officer fails to deduct the salary as specified in the said
order, he shall make himself liable for a similar penalty.
(4) In order to get its orders complied with, the Lokpal shall have, and exercise the same jurisdiction
powers and authority in respect of contempt of itself as a High court has and may exercise, and,
for this purpose, the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (Central Act 70 of 1971)
shall have the effect subject to the modification that the references therein to the High Court
shall be construed as including a reference to the Lokpal.
13A. Special Judges under section 4 of Prevention of Corruption Act: On an annual basis, Lokpal shall
make an assessment of the number of Special Judges required under section 4 of Prevention of
Corruption Act 1988 in each area and the Government shall appoint such number of Judges within three
months of receipt of such recommendation.
Provided that Lokpal shall recommend such number of Special Judges so that trial in each case under
this Act is completed within a year.
13B. Issue of Letter Rogatory: A bench of Lokpal shall have powers to issue Letters Rogatory in any case
pending with Lokpal.
Functioning of Lokpal
14. Functioning of Lokpal: (1) The Chairperson shall be responsible for overall administration and
supervision of the institution of Lokpal.
(2) All policy level decisions including formulation of regulations, developing internal systems for the
functioning of Lokpal, assigning functions to various officials in Lokpal, delegation of powers to various
functionaries in Lokpal etc shall be taken by the Chairperson and the members collectively as a body.
(3) The Chairperson shall have an annual meeting with the Prime Minister to assess the needs of Lokpal
for finances and manpower. Lokpal shall be provided resources by the Government on the basis of
outcome of this meeting.
(4) Lokpal shall function in benches of three or more members. Benches shall be constituted randomly
and cases shall be assigned to them randomly by computer. Each bench shall consist of at least one
member with legal background.
(5) Such benches shall be responsible for
(i) granting permission to close any case after a preliminary enquiry
(ii) granting permission to either close a case after investigations or issuing orders imposing
penalties under CCS Conduct Rules and/or for initiating prosecution in that case.
(iii) Issuing orders under section 28 and section 13B.
(6) Lokpal may decide to initiate investigations into any case suo moto also.
(7) The decision to initiate investigation or prosecution against any member of the Cabinet or any judge
of High Court or Supreme Court shall be taken in a meeting of all the existing members and the
Chairperson. Minutes and records of such meetings shall be made public.
15. Making a complaint to the Lokpal: (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, any person may make a
complaint under this Act to the Lokpal.
Provided that in case of a grievance, if the person aggrieved is dead or for any reason, unable to
act for himself, the complaint may be made or if it is already made may be continued by his legal
representatives or by any other person who is authorized by him in writing in this behalf.
(2) A complaint could be on a plain paper but should contain all such details as prescribed by Lokpal.
(3) On receipt of a complaint, the Lokpal shall decide whether it is an allegation or a grievance or a
request for whistleblower protection or a mixture of two or more of these.
(4) Every complaint shall have to be compulsorily disposed off by the Lokpal.
Provided that no complaint, other than those which are anonymous or pseudonymous, shall be closed
without hearing the complainant.
16. Matters which may be investigated by the Lokpal– Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Lokpal
may investigate any action which is taken by or with the general or specific approval of a public servant
where a complaint involving a grievance or an allegation is made in respect of such action.
Provided that the Lokpal may also investigate such action suo moto or if it is referred to it by the
government, if such action can be or could have been in his recorded opinion, subject of a grievance or
an allegation.
17. Matters not subject to investigation:- (1) The Lokpal shall not conduct any investigation under this
Act in case of a grievance in respect of any action-
(i) if the complainant has or had, any remedy by way of appeal, revision, review or any other
remedy before any other authority provided in any other law and he has not availed of the
(ii) Taken by a judicial or quasi-judicial body, unless the complainant alleges malafides
(iii) If the substance of the entire grievance is pending before any court or quasi-judicial body
of competent jurisdiction.
(iv) any grievance where there is inordinate and inexplicable delay.
(2) Nothing in this Act shall be construed as authorising the Lokpal to investigate any action which is
taken by or with the approval of the Presiding Officer of either House of Parliament.
(3) The provisions of this Act shall be in addition to the provisions of any other enactment or any rule or
law under which any remedy by way of appeal, revision, review or in any other manner is available to a
person making a complaint under this Act in respect of any action and nothing in this Act shall limit or
affect the right of such person to avail of such remedy.
(4) Nothing in this section shall bar Lokpal from entertaining a complaint making an allegation of
misconduct or corruption or a complaint from a whistleblower seeking protection.
18. Provisions relating to complaints and investigations-
(i) (a) The Lokpal, on receipt of a complaint in the nature of an allegation or a grievance or a
combination of the two, or in a case initiated on his own motion, may on perusing the
documents, either decide to proceed to enquire or investigate into that complaint or decide,
to make such preliminary inquiry before proceeding to enquire or investigate into such
complaint or direct any other person to make such preliminary inquiry as it deems fit for
ascertaining whether there exists reasonable ground for conducting the investigation. The
outcome of such preliminary enquiry, and if the complaint is being closed along with
reasons for the same and all material collected during preliminary enquiry, shall be
communicated to the complainant.
Provided that if any case is closed, all documents related thereto shall thereafter be
treated as public. Every month, a list of all such cases shall be put on the website with
reasons for closing a case. All material connected with such closed cases will be provided to
anyone seeking it under Right to Information Act.
Provided further that if the complaint contains verifiable and specific information about
misconduct or corruption, then that case shall not be rejected even if the complaint is
Provided further that no complaint of allegation shall be rejected by questioning the
motives or intention of the complainant.
Provided further that all hearings before Lokpal shall be video recorded and shall be
available to any member of the public on payment of copying costs.
(b) The procedure for preliminary enquiry of a complaint shall be such as the Lokpal deems
appropriate in the circumstances of the case and in particular, the Lokpal may, if it deems
necessary to do so, call for the comments of the public servant concerned.
Provided that the preliminary enquiry should be completed and a decision taken whether
to close a case or to proceed with investigations within one month of receipt of any
(ii) Where the Lokpal proposes, either directly or after making preliminary inquiry, to conduct
any investigation under this Act, he.-
(a) may make such order as to the safe custody of documents relevant to the
investigation, as it deems fit.
(b) at appropriate stage of investigations or in the end, it shall forward a copy of the
complaint, its findings and copy of the material relied upon to the concerned public
servant and the complainant,
(c) shall afford to such public servant and the complainant an opportunity to offer
comments and be heard.
Provided that such hearing shall be held in public, except in such rare circumstances, to
be recorded in writing, will it be held in camera.
(iii) The conduct of an investigation under this Act against a Public servant in respect of any
action shall not affect such action, or any power or duty of any other public servant to take
further action with respect to any matter subject to the investigation.
(iv) If, during the course of preliminary inquiry or investigation under this Act, the Lokpal is
prima facie satisfied that the allegation or grievance in respect of any action is likely to be
sustained either wholly or partly, he may, through an interim order, direct the public servant
concerned to stay the implementation or enforcement of the decision or action complained
against, or to take such mandatory or preventive action, on such terms and conditions, as he
may specify in his order to prevent further harm from taking place.
(v) The Lokpal, either during the course of investigations, if it is satisfied that prosecution is
likely to be initiated in that case, or at the end of the investigations at the time of initiating
prosecution, shall make a list of moveable and immoveable assets of all the accused in that
case and shall notify the same. No transfer of the same shall be permitted after such
notification. In the event of final conviction, the court shall be empowered to recover loss
determined under section 19 of this Act from this property, in addition to other measures.
(vi) If during the course of investigation or enquiry into a complaint, Lokpal feels that
continuance of a public servant in that position could adversely affect the course of
investigations or enquiry or that the said person is likely to impact evidence or witnesses,
the Lokpal may issue appropriate orders including transfer of that public servant from that
position or his suspension.
Provided that such orders shall not be passed against the Prime Minister.
(vii) In case of a grievance, the Lokpal may issue interim orders to the appropriate authority
recommending grant of interim relief to the complainant if he is satisfied at any stage of
preliminary inquiry on investigation that the complainant has sustained injustice or undue
hardship in consequence of any decision or action of a public servant.
(viii) The Lokpal may, at any stage of inquiry or investigation under this Act, direct through an
interim order, appropriate authorities to take such action as is necessary, including
suspension of a government servant, pending inquiry or investigation.-
(i) to safeguard wastage or damage of public property or public revenue by the
administrative acts of the public servant;
(ii) to prevent further acts of misconduct by the public servant;
(iii) to prevent the public servant from secreting the assets allegedly acquired by him by
corrupt means;
(ix) Where after investigation into a complaint, the Lokpal is satisfied that the complaint
involving an allegation against the public servant is substantiated and that the public servant
concerned should not continue to hold the post held by him, the Lokpal shall pass orders to
that effect. In case of public servant being a Minister, Lokpal shall make such
recommendation to the President, who shall decide either to accept such recommendation
or reject it within a month of its receipt.
Provided that the provisions of this section shall not apply to the Prime Minister.
(x) If, after enquiry into a grievance and after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard
to both the complainant and the public authority, the Lokpal is satisfied that such grievance
is substantiated either wholly or partly, he shall,
i. Pass appropriate orders directing appropriate authorities to redress the grievance
in a manner and within the time prescribed in the order, and
ii. Direct the appropriate authorities to deduct from the salary of the officials
mentioned in the order, such penalty amounts as are directed by Lokpal , which
shall not be less than Rs 250 per day of delay calculated from day the time limit
mentioned in citizens’ charter for redressing that grievance got over, and
iii. Direct the appropriate authorities to compensate the complainant with such
amounts as mentioned in the order.
Provided that any grievance shall be disposed within 15 days of its receipt.
Provided further that if it relates to life and liberty of a person or if the matter is such as to
warrant immediate attention and the Lokpal is so satisfied, the same shall be disposed
within 48 hours.
(xi) All records and information of Lokpal shall be public and shall be provided under Right to
Information Act, even at the stage of investigation or enquiry, unless release of such
information would adversely affect the process of enquiry or investigation.
Provided that no information in any case shall be withheld under Right to Information
Act after the completion of enquiry or investigation.
Recovery of Loss to the Government and punishments
19. Recovery of loss to the Government: If a person is convicted of an offence under Prevention of
Corruption Act, then the trial court will also quantify the loss caused to the government and apportion
that amount to various convicts from whom this money must be recovered as arrears of land revenue.
19A. Punishments for offences: For offences mentioned in Chapter III of Prevention of Corruption Act,
punishment shall not be less than five years which may extend upto life imprisonment.
Provided that if the accused is any officer of the rank of Joint Secretary in the state or above or a
Minister, the punishment shall not be less than ten years.
Provided further that if the offence is of the nature mentioned in proviso to section 2(4) of this Act and if
the beneficiary is any corporate house, in addition to other punishments mentioned in this Act and
under Prevention of Corruption Act, a fine amounting to five times the loss caused to the government
shall be recovered from the accused and the recovery may be done from the assets of the company and
from the personal assets of all Directors of the company, if the assets of the accused are inadequate.
Whistleblower protection
20. Protection of Whistleblower: (1) A whistleblower may write to Lokpal seeking protection from
threat of physical or professional victimization or if he has been subjected to such professional or
physical victimization.
(2) On receiving such a complaint, Lokpal shall take following steps:
(a) Threat of professional victimization: Lokpal shall conduct appropriate enquiries and if it feels
that there is a real threat to the person and the threat is on account of that person having made
an allegation under this Act, then the Lokpal shall pass appropriate orders, as soon as possible
but in not more than a month of receipt of such complaint, directing appropriate authorities to
take such steps as directed by the Lokpal.
(b) If a person complains that he has already been victimized professionally on account of
making an allegation under this Act, Lokpal shall, after conducting enquiries, if he is of the
opinion that the victimization is indeed because of that person’s having made an allegation
under this Act, pass appropriate orders, as soon as possible but in not more than a month,
directing appropriate authorities to take such steps as directed by the Lokpal.
Provided that for clause (a) Lokpal may, but for clause (b) the Lokpal shall, also issue
orders imposing penalties under CCS Conduct Rules against the officer or officials who issued
threats or caused victimization.
Provided further that no such penalties shall be imposed without giving an opportunity
of being heard to the affected officials.
(c) Threat of physical victimization: Lokpal shall conduct appropriate enquiries and if it feels that
there is a real threat to the person and the threat is on account of that person having made an
allegation under this Act or for having filed an RTI application to any public authority covered
under this Act, then notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, the Lokpal shall pass
appropriate orders, as soon as possible but in not more than a week, directing appropriate
authorities, including police, to take such steps as directed by the Lokpal to provide adequate
security to that person, to register criminal cases against those who are issuing threats and also
to take all such steps necessary to mitigate circumstances leading to such threat.
Provided that if the threat is imminent, Lokpal may decide to act immediately, within a
few hours to prevent physical assault on that person.
(d) If a person complains that he has already been physically assaulted on account of making an
allegation under this Act and if Lokpal is satisfied after conducting enquiries that the person has
been assaulted because of his having made an allegation under this Act or for filing an RTI
application in any of the public authorities covered under this Act, then notwithstanding
anything else contained in any other law, the Lokpal shall pass such orders, as soon as possible
but in not more than 24 hours, directing the concerned authorities to take such steps as
directed by the Lokpal to provide adequate security to that person, to register criminal cases
and also to ensure that no further harm visits on that person.
(e) If the whistleblower has alleged an act punishable under Prevention of Corruption Act, then
for cases under clause (c), Lokpal may and for cases under clause (d), the Lokpal shall, assign the
allegations made by that person to a special team, put it on a fast track and complete
investigations in that case in not more than a month.
(f) If the whistleblower has alleged an act punishable under any law other than the Prevention
of Corruption Act, then for cases under clause (c), Lokpal may and for cases under clause (d), the
Lokpal shall, direct the agency which has the powers to enforce that law to assign the
allegations made by the whistleblower to a special team, put it on a fast track and complete
investigations in that case in such time as directed by the Lokpal.
(g) Lokpal shall have the powers to issue directions to appropriate agencies in the cases covered
under clause (f), monitor such investigations and if necessary, issue directions to that agency to
do the investigations in the manner as directed by the Lokpal.
(3) If any complainant requests that his identity should be kept secret, Lokpal shall ensure the same.
Lokpal shall prescribe detailed procedures on how such complainants shall be dealt with.
(4) Lokpal shall Issue orders to the Public Authorities to make necessary changes in their policies and
practices to prevent recurrence of victimization.
Grievance Redressal Systems
21. Citizens’ Charters: (1) Each public authority shall be responsible for ensuring the preparation and
implementation of Citizens Charter, within a reasonable time, and not exceeding one year from the
coming into force of this Act.
(2) Every Citizens Charter shall enumerate the commitments of the respective public authority to the
citizens, officer responsible for meeting each such commitment and the time limit with in which the
commitment shall be met.
(3) Each public authority shall designate an official called Public Grievance Redressal Officer, whom a
complainant should approach for any violation of the Citizens Charter.
(4) Every public authority shall review and revise its Citizens Charter at least once every year through a
process of public consultation.
(5) Lokpal may direct any public authority to make such changes in their citizens’ charter as are
mentioned in that order.
(6) No grievance shall be accepted by Lokpal if 15 days have not elapsed after submission of complaint
by the complainant with the Public Grievance redressal Officer of that Public Authority.
Provided that if Lokpal feels that considering the gravity or urgency of the grievance, it is
necessary to do so, the Lokpal may decide to accept such grievance earlier also.
Employees and staff and authorities in Lokpal
22. Chief Vigilance Officer: (1) There shall be a Chief Vigilance Officer in each public authority to be
selected and appointed by Lokpal.
(2) He shall not be from the same public authority.
(3) He shall be a person of impeccable integrity and ability to take proactive measures against
(4) He shall be responsible for accepting complaints against any public authority and shall transfer the
complaints related to other public authorities within two days of receipt.
(5) He shall be responsible for carrying out all such responsibilities as assigned to him from time to time
by Lokpal including dealing with complaints in the manner as laid down by Lokpal from time to time.
Provided that the complaints which require investigations under Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 shall
be transferred to the Investigative wing of Lokpal.
Provided further that the complaints, other than grievances, against officers of the level of Joint
Secretary or above shall not be dealt by the Chief Vigilance Officer and shall be transferred to the
Lokpal, who shall set up a committee of Chief Vigilance Officers of three other public authorities to
enquire into such complaint.
(6) All the grievances shall be received and disposed by Chief Vigilance Officer on behalf of Lokpal, if the
citizen fails to get satisfactory redressal from Public Grievance Officer under section 21 of this Act.
23. Staff of Lokpal, etc.- (1) There shall be such officers and employees as may be prescribed to assist
the Lokpal in the discharge of their functions under this Act.
(2) The number and categories of officers and employees shall be decided by the Lokpal in
consultation with the government.
(3) The categories, recruitment and conditions of service of the officers and employees referred
in sub-section (1) including such special conditions or special pay as may be necessary for enabling them
to act without fear in the discharge of their functions, shall be such as may be prescribed according to
the recommendations of Lokpal.
Provided that no official, whose integrity is in doubt, shall be considered for being posted in
Provided further that all officers and employees, who work in Lokpal on deputation or otherwise
shall be eligible for the same terms and conditions as prescribed under this clause.
(4) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), the Lokpal may for the purpose of
conducting investigations under this Act utilize the services of.-
(a) any officer or investigating agency of the Central Government; or
(b) any officer or investigating agency of any other Government with the prior
concurrence of that Government; or
(c) any person or any other agency.
(5) The officers and other employees referred to in sub-section (1) shall be under the
administrative and disciplinary control of the Lokpal:
(6) Lokpal shall have the powers to choose its own officials. Lokpal may enlist officials on
deputation from other government agencies for a fixed tenure or it may enlist officials on permanent
basis from other government agencies or it may appoint people from outside on permanent basis or on
a fixed tenure basis.
(7) The staff and officers shall be entitled to such pay scales and other allowances, which may be
different and more than the ordinary pay scales in the Central Government, as are decided by the Lokpal
from time to time, in consultation with the Prime Minister, so as to attract honest and efficient people
to work in Lokpal.
24. Repeal and savings – (1) The Central Vigilance Commission Act shall stand repealed.
(2) Notwithstanding such repeal, any act or thing done under the said Act shall be deemed to have been
done under this Act and may be continued and completed under the corresponding provisions of this
(3) All enquiries and investigations and other disciplinary proceedings pending before the Central
Vigilance Commission and which have not been disposed of, shall stand transferred to and be continued
by the Lokpal as if they were commenced before him under this Act.
(4) Notwithstanding anything contained in any Act, the posts of the Secretary and other Officers and
Employees of the Central Vigilance Commission are hereby abolished and they are hereby appointed as
the Secretary and other officers and employees of the Lokpal. The salaries, allowances and other terms
and conditions of services of the said Secretary, officers and other employees shall, until they are varied,
be the same as to which they were entitled to immediately before the commencement of this Act.
(5) All vigilance administration under the control of all Departments of Central Government, Ministries
of the Central Government, corporations established by or under any Central Act, Government
companies, societies and local authorities owned or controlled by the Central Government shall stand
transferred, alongwith its personnel, assets and liabilities to Lokpal for all purposes.
(6) The personnel working in vigilance wings of the agencies mentioned in sub-section (5) shall be
deemed to be on deputation to Lokpal for a period of five years from the date they are transferred to
Lokpal. However, Lokpal may decide to repatriate any one of them anytime.
(7) That Department from where any personnel have been transferred to Lokpal under sub-section (5),
shall cease to have any control over the administration and functions of transferred personnel.
(8) Lokpal shall rotate the personnel and create vigilance wing of each department in such a way that no
personnel from the same department get posted for vigilance functions in the same department.
(9) No person shall be employed with Lokpal against whom any vigilance enquiry or any criminal case is
pending at the time of being considered.
25. Investigation Wing of Lokpal: (1) There shall be an investigation wing at Lokpal.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 17 of Prevention of Corruption Act, such officers of
Investigation wing, upto the level as decided by Lokpal, shall have, in relation to the investigation and
arrest of persons throughout India, in connection with investigation of complaints under this Act, all the
powers, duties, privileges and liabilities which members of Delhi Special Police Establishment have in
connection with the investigation of offences committed therein.
(3) That part of Delhi Special Police Establishment, in so far as it relates to investigation and prosecution
of offences alleged to have been committed under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, shall stand
transferred, alongwith its employees, assets and liabilities to Lokpal for all purposes.
(4) That part of Delhi Special Police Establishment, which has been transferred under sub-section (3),
shall form part of Investigation Wing of Lokpal.
(5) The Central Government shall cease to have any control over the transferred part and its personnel.
(6) The salaries, allowances and other terms and conditions of services of the personnel transferred
under sub-section (3) shall be the same as to which they were entitled to immediately before the
commencement of this Act.
(7) All cases which were being dealt by that part of Delhi Special Police Establishment, which has been
transferred under sub-section (3), shall stand transferred to Lokpal.
(8) After completion of investigation in any case, the investigation wing shall present the case to an
appropriate bench of Lokpal, which shall decide whether to grant permission for prosecution or not.
26. Complaints against officers or employees of Lokpal: (1) Complaints against employees or officers of
Lokpal shall be dealt with separately and as per provisions of this section.
(2) Such complaint could relate to an allegation of an offence punishable under Prevention of Corruption
Act or a misconduct or a dishonest enquiry or investigation.
(3) As soon as such a complaint is received, the same shall be displayed on the website of Lokpal,
alongwith the contents of the complaint.
(4) Investigations into each such complaint shall be completed within a month of its receipt.
(5) In addition to examining the allegations against the said official, the allegations shall especially be
examined against sections 107, 166, 167, 177, 182, 191, 192, 196, 199, 200, 201, 202, 204, 217, 218,
219, 463, 464, 468, 469, 470, 471, 474 of Indian Penal Code.
(6) If, during the course of investigations, the Lokpal feels that the charges are likely to be sustained, the
Lokpal shall divest such officer of all his responsibilities and powers and shall place him under
(7) If after completion of enquiry or investigations, Lokpal decides to prosecute that person under
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 or holds him guilty of any misconduct or of conducting dishonest
enquiry or investigations, then that person shall not work with Lokpal anymore. Lokpal shall either
dismiss that person from the job, if that person is in the employment of Lokpal, or shall repatriate him, if
he is on deputation.
Provided that no order under this clause shall be passed without giving reasonable opportunity of being
heard to the accused person.
Provided further that order under this clause shall be passed within 15 days of completion of
(8) There shall be a separate wing in Lokpal to deal with complaints against officers or staff of Lokpal.
(9) Lokpal shall take all steps to ensure that all enquiries and investigations on complaints against its
own staff and officials are conducted in most transparent and honest manner.
27. Protection- (1) No suit, prosecution, or other legal proceedings shall lie against the Chairperson or
members or against any officer, employee, agency or person referred to in Section 14(4) in respect of
anything which is in good faith done while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official
duties under this Act.
(2) No proceedings of the Lokpal shall be held to be bad for want of form and except on the ground of
jurisdiction, no proceedings or decision of the Lokpal shall be liable to be challenged, reviewed, quashed
or called in question in any court of ordinary Civil Jurisdiction.
28. Public Servants to submit property statements-
(1) Every public servant, other than those mentioned in Section 2(11)(a) to (c), shall within three months
after the commencement of this Act and thereafter before the 30th June of every year submit to the
head of that public authority, in the form prescribed by Lokpal, a statement of his assets and liabilities
and those of the members of his family. Public servants mentioned in sections 2(11)(a) to (c) shall
submit their returns in a format prescribed by the Lokpal to the Lokpal with the aforesaid time lines.
(2) The Head of each public authority shall ensure that all such statements are put on the website by 31st
August of that year.
(3) If no such statement is received by the Head of that public authority from any such public servant
within the time specified in sub-section (1), the Head of that public authority shall direct the concerned
public servant to do so immediately. If within next one month, the public servant concerned does not
submit such statement, the Head shall stop the salary and allowances of that public servant till he
submits such statement.
Explanation- In this section “family of a public servant” means the spouse and such children and
parents of the public servant as are dependent on him.
(4) The Lokpal may initiate prosecution against such public servant under Section 176 IPC.
(5) If any public servant furnishes any statement, which is subsequently found to be incorrect, then
Lokpal, in addition to taking action against the said public servant under other sections of this Act, may
also impose a penalty upto a maximum of 50% of the value of the additional property subsequently
detected. Lokpal shall also intimate such information to the Income Tax Department for appropriate
29. Power to delegate and assign functions: (1) Lokpal shall be competent to delegate its powers and
assign functions to the officials working in Lokpal.
(2) All functions carried out and powers exercised by such officials shall be deemed to have been so
done by the Lokpal.
Provided that the following functions shall be performed by the benches and cannot be delegated:
(i) Granting permission to initiate prosecution in any case.
(ii) Order for dismissal of any government servant under CCS Conduct Rules.
(iii) Passing orders under section 10 on complaints against officials and staff of Lokpal.
(iv) Pass orders in cases of complaints, other than grievances, against officers of the level of Joint
Secretary and above.
30. Time limits: (1) Preliminary enquiry under sub-section (1) of section 9 of this Act should be
completed within a month of receipt of complaint.
Provided that the enquiry officer shall be liable for an explanation if the enquiry is not completed within
this time limit.
(2) Investigation into any allegation shall be completed within six months, and in any case, not more
than one year, from the date of receipt of complaint.
(3) Trial in any case filed by Lokpal should be completed within one year. Adjournments should be
granted in rarest circumstances.
31. Penalty for false complaint- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, if someone makes
any false or frivolous complaint under this Act, Lokpal may impose such fines on that complainant as it
deems fit.
Provided that no fine can be imposed without giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
(2) Such fines shall be recoverable as dues under Land Revenue Act.
(3) A complaint or allegation once made under this Act shall not be allowed to be withdrawn.
31A. Preventive measures: (1) Lokpal shall, at regular intervals, either study itself or cause to be studied
the functioning of all public authorities falling within its jurisdiction and in consultation with respective
public authority, issue such directions as it deems fit to prevent incidence of corruption in future.
(2) Lokpal shall also be responsible for creating awareness about this Act and involving general public in
curbing corruption and maladministration.
32. Power to make Rules – (1) The Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules
for the purpose of carrying into effect the provisions of this Act.
Provided that such rules shall be made only in consultation and with the approval of Lokpal.
(2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provisions, such rules may
provide for .-
(i) the allowance and pensions payable to and other conditions of service of the Chairperson and
members of Lokpal;
(ii) the powers of a Civil Court which may be exercised by the Lokpal under clause (h) of sub-section
(2) of section 11;
(iii) the salary, allowances, recruitment and other conditions of service of the staff and employees of
the Lokpal;
(iv) any other matter for which rules have to be made are necessary under this Act.
(3) Any rule made under this Act may be made with retrospective effect and when such a rule is
made the reasons for making the rule shall be specified in a Statement laid before both Houses of the
33. Removal of difficulties- Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the President, in
consultation with Lokpal or on request of Lokpal may, by order, make such provision –
(i) for bringing the provisions of this Act into effective operation;
(ii) for continuing the enquiries and investigations pending before the Central Vigilance Commission by
the Lokpal.
34. Power to make regulations: Lokpal shall have power to make its own regulations for the smooth
functioning of the institution and to effectively implement various provisions of this Act.
35. This Act shall override the provisions of all other laws.

Career Selection for Young People

Career choice is one of the most important decisions in anyone’s life, and yet countless young people enter careers which later prove to be wholly unsuitable.

Even today most young people have no way to find out if a particular career would really suit them. Decisions that are central to future happiness and success are therefore very often being taken in the dark.

Career Callings transforms the knowledge available to every young person, to enable the right choices to be made. Participants are guided through a series of enjoyable and imaginative exercises to identify the career path that will suit their abilities and interests. Steps include a series of tests to identify abilities, aptitudes, strengths, values and interests which are essential elements in making a successful career selection:

* Visualising an ideal work day
* Identifying personal values that will form the foundation of a successful career
* Identifying individual talents, strengths and accomplishments
* Defining worthwhile and appropriate ambitions
* Assessing levels of interest and ability for different career options
* Clarifying a path for the next 10 years
* Devising a plan of action

The results are brought together in a number of steps to identify career options that will be genuinely satisfying, inspiring and rewarding.

Young people who do not know what career to choose will find out what options they are likely to find satisfying, and how to move forward. Others who have already made a career or study choice will gain added confidence that they are on the right track.

The programme complements the computerised assessments that are available in some schools, going into much greater depth, helping to explore options that may not have been considered before and providing confidence that a career choice will be truly fulfilling.

Career Callings is available for young people as a short course or personal coaching from £350. The course is also available for delivery in schools, where reduced prices are available for large groups.

Career coaching is also available on a one-to-one basis by telephone, where specific questions are to be addressed or where attendance at a course location is impracticable.

Click here for comments by others who have attended Career Callings.

To discuss questions and course dates call 00 33 (0)4 94 43 45 05 and propose a time and telephone number when one of our specialists can call you or email
Career Callings was created by Pamela Grant of Houston, Texas. She has a Master of Science degree in Occupational Education and has been advising companies, coaching private clients and facilitating career transitions for over 15 years. Her mission is to encourage and support others in identifying and moving into their ideal careers. In 2001 her programme was brought to Europe, where Alison Davis is certified as the Senior Consultant and Practitioner.

What is the Jan Lokpal Bill, why it’s important

The Jan Lokpal Bill (Citizen’s ombudsman Bill) is a draft anti-corruption bill drawn up by prominent civil society activists seeking the appointment of a Jan Lokpal, an independent body that would investigate corruption cases, complete the investigation within a year and envisages trial in the case getting over in the next one year.

Drafted by Justice Santosh Hegde (former Supreme Court Judge and present Lokayukta of Karnataka), Prashant Bhushan (Supreme Court Lawyer) and Arvind Kejriwal (RTI activist), the draft Bill envisages a system where a corrupt person found guilty would go to jail within two years of the complaint being made and his ill-gotten wealth being confiscated. It also seeks power to the Jan Lokpal to prosecute politicians and bureaucrats without government permission.

Retired IPS officer Kiran Bedi and other known people like Swami Agnivesh, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, Anna Hazare and Mallika Sarabhai are also part of the movement, called India Against Corruption. Its website describes the movement as “an expression of collective anger of people of India against corruption. We have all come together to force/request/persuade/pressurize the Government to enact the Jan Lokpal Bill. We feel that if this Bill were enacted it would create an effective deterrence against corruption.”
Anna Hazare, anti-corruption crusader, began a fast-unto-death today, demanding that this bill, drafted by the civil society, be adopted. The website of the India Against Corruption movement calls the Lokpal Bill of the government an “eyewash” and has on it a critique of that government Bill. It also lists the difference between the Bills drafted by the government and civil society.
A look at the salient features of Jan Lokpal Bill:

1. An institution called LOKPAL at the centre and LOKAYUKTA in each state will be set up

2. Like Supreme Court and Election Commission, they will be completely independent of the governments. No minister or bureaucrat will be able to influence their investigations.

3. Cases against corrupt people will not linger on for years anymore: Investigations in any case will have to be completed in one year. Trial should be completed in next one year so that the corrupt politician, officer or judge is sent to jail within two years.

4. The loss that a corrupt person caused to the government will be recovered at the time of conviction.

5. How will it help a common citizen: If any work of any citizen is not done in prescribed time in any government office, Lokpal will impose financial penalty on guilty officers, which will be given as compensation to the complainant.

6. So, you could approach Lokpal if your ration card or passport or voter card is not being made or if police is not registering your case or any other work is not being done in prescribed time. Lokpal will have to get it done in a month’s time. You could also report any case of corruption to Lokpal like ration being siphoned off, poor quality roads been constructed or panchayat funds being siphoned off. Lokpal will have to complete its investigations in a year, trial will be over in next one year and the guilty will go to jail within two years.

7. But won’t the government appoint corrupt and weak people as Lokpal members? That won’t be possible because its members will be selected by judges, citizens and constitutional authorities and not by politicians, through a completely transparent and participatory process.

8. What if some officer in Lokpal becomes corrupt? The entire functioning of Lokpal/ Lokayukta will be completely transparent. Any complaint against any officer of Lokpal shall be investigated and the officer dismissed within two months.

9. What will happen to existing anti-corruption agencies? CVC, departmental vigilance and anti-corruption branch of CBI will be merged into Lokpal. Lokpal will have complete powers and machinery to independently investigate and prosecute any officer, judge or politician.

10. It will be the duty of the Lokpal to provide protection to those who are being victimized for raising their voice against corruption.