Prior to the outbreak of the Second World War corruption among Public Servants was not felt as a social or national problem, though it was moderately confined to the lower ranks of the civil service. In particular corruption was prevalent in considerable measure amongst revenue, police, excise and public works department officials, in the lower grades. The higher ranks were comparatively free from this evil.

The immense war efforts of 1939, which involved annual expenditure of hundred of crores of rupees over all kinds of supplies and contracts created unprecedented opportunities for acquisition of wealth by doubtful means. Controls and scarcities generated by war provided ample opportunities for bribery, corruption, nepotism etc. In the face of the threat faced by the country, all out efforts were concentrated on war effort. Prompt attention was not paid towards the looming social danger that was destined to grow to gigantic dimensions and persist as a permanent problem in the decades ahead.

However the Government for long could not ignore the emerging virus in its administration. To arrest the spreading cancer of corruption among its servants, the then Government, by an executive order created the Special Police Establishment in the year 1941 under the War Department. As the exercise of investigative powers of the SPE was challenged before courts, Government to remedy the situation promulgated Ordinance XXII of 1943 to confer legal status and authority to the SPE. When this ordinance lapsed, a new ordinance (Ordinance 22 of 46) took its place. Finally Government in 1946 passed the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act.

The objects clauses of the act specifies the purpose of the act as "to make provision for the constitution of a Special Police force in Delhi for the investigation of certain offences in the Union Territories, for the superintendence and administration of the said force and for the extension to other areas of the powers and jurisdiction of members of the said force in regard to the investigation of the said offences".

The act extends to the whole of India. The superintendence of the Delhi Special Police Establishment vested with the Central Government. In terms of recent order of the Supreme Court of India, it is now transferred and vests with Central Vigilance Commission since 1998.

The jurisdiction of the SPE extends all-over India. But the SPE has to exercise its jurisdiction in any area of a State, (other than Union Territories) only with the consent of the Government of that State.

As a further measure for the effective prevention of Bribery and Corruption, the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 was enacted. The objects and reason for this enactment was stated by the Government as under:

"The scope for bribery and corruption of public servants had been enormously increased by war conditions and though the war is now over, opportunities for corrupt practice will remain for considerable time to come. Contracts are being terminated; large amount of Government Surplus stores are being disposed of; there will be for years shortage of various kinds essential goods requiring imposition of controls and extensive schemes of post war reconstruction involving the disbursement of very large sums of Government money. All these activities offer wide scope for corruption and seriousness of the evil and possibility of its continuance or extension in future are such as to justify immediate and drastic action to stamp it out"

The country attained Independence in August 1947. The Government, which assumed office after independence, showed considerable concern to weed out the evil of corruption. In 1949 the Tek Chand Committee was appointed to review the working of the Prevention of Corruption Act. In 1951 the committee was also requested to assess the working of the SPE and its efficacy in combating corruption. All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955 were formulated.

To provide for expeditious trial of offences involving corruption by public servants under Sec.161, 162, 163, 164, 165or Section 165A of Indian Penal Code or Section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947, Government passed the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1952. This Act provided for trial by special judges thus modifying selectively the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.

In October 1953, the Railway Corruption Enquiry Committee was appointed under Chairmanship of Acharya Kripalini. The Administrative Vigilance Division was set up in Govt. of India in August 1955 and the vigilance units in the Ministries/Departments came into existence immediately thereafter. To update your knowledge, I may point out that the Administrative Vigilance Division has been now scrapped after 1998, when the CVC was made a statutory body. Similarly CVOs (Chief Vigilance Officers) approved by the CVC function in all Vigilance Units in the Ministries/Departments under direct supervision and guidance of the CVC.

The second World War bought forth the evil of corruption to become widespread in public services. It got a further momentum and impetus in the post war period on account of the country accepting development planing on a large scale, budgeted heavily through deficit financing with inflation reaching double digits. The sudden expansion of Governmental activities in economic spheres resulted in a plethora of regulations, controls, licences and permits. These provided large opportunities for the unscrupulous elements in public service to capitalize on them. The Government was, consequently, waging a losing battle and it could not keep up the momentum of its anti-corruption drive. Speed Money became the watchword for pushing files through the maze of red tape and the caverns of rules and regulations. Corruption not only increased, but became a way of life in the civil and public services with the common man meekly accepting the inevitable and adjusting to live with it.

It was in this background that in June 1962, Government of India announced the appointment of a committee under Shri K.Santhanam, M.P. with a wide list of references to examine the problem and all attendant matters in their complete perspective to recommend comprehensive solutions. The Committee, which came to be popularly identified now as the Santhanam Committee submitted its report on 31-3-64. This report marked a high watermark in the crusade against corruption. The broad cantours of the anti-corruption framework that exists even today is inherited from its recommendations.

The committee suggested various reforms, which were accepted by the Government. Some of the follow-up measures carried out were as under:

1. The Anti-corruption Laws (Amendment) Act 1964 was enacted with a view to make the anti-corruption laws more effective and to ensure speedy trial of cases.

2. Central Vigilance Commission came into being in 1964

3. Vigilance Organizations in Railways and other Ministries were revamped.

4. Conduct Rules of public servants were reviewed and loopholes plugged. The Central Civil Services (Classification, control and Appeal) Rules came into force from 1st December 1965, modifying the existing Rules framed in 1957.

5. Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules 1964 and All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968 updated these regulations based on Articles 309, 310 &311 of the Constitution of India. It was followed by All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules 1969

The Indian Penal Code, 1860 is the central piece of legislation in India in combating all types of crimes. The corresponding procedural legislation describing various steps and courses to be followed in respect investigation, prosecution etc. under the Act is covered by the Code of Criminal Procedure. But corruption, as such, is not mentioned or described as a specific offence in the Indian Penal Code. This is because Corruption is recognized as a category or group of offences, which were earlier individually defined and punishment therefor mentioned in the Indian Penal Code. The various offences were earlier included in the Indian Penal Code under Section 161 to 165 and 165A, but have now been repealed with the Passing of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988. The provisions that were part of Chapter IX of Indian Penal Code under Section Nos. referred above are now incorporated under Sec. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

These offences covered in the group of offences (commonly recognized as 'corruption in public services ) are as under:

• Sec.161 - Public servant taking gratification other than legal remuneration in respect of an official act (presently covered by Sec.7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988)

• Sec.162 -Taking gratification, in order, by corrupt or illegal means to influence public servants (presently covered by Sec.8 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988)

• Sec.163 -Taking gratification, for exercise or personal influence with public servant. (presently covered by Sec.9 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988)

• Sec.164- Punishment for abetment by Public Servant of offences defined in Section 162 or163. (presently covered by Sec.10 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988)

• Sec. 165- Public servant obtaining valuable thing, without consideration, from person concerned in proceeding or business transacted, by such public servant (presently covered by Sec.11 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988)

• Sec. 165A- Punishment for abetment of offences defined in Section 161 or Section 165 (presently covered by Sec.12 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988)

In 1988 in order to have a single consolidated and precise enactment for dealing with increasing number of criminal cases investigated by the CBI, the P.C Act was again amended by incorporating relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code (sections 16l to165 and 165A) within the ambit of the P.C.Act as referred earlier. The Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1952 was also repealed by incorporating its provisions in the P.C. Act, 1988. The consolidated P.C.Act, 1988 was passed by the Parliament on 9th September 1988. The P.C. Act, 1988 is therefore a substantive as well as procedural legislation to deal with corruption in public services. However proceedings under the Act will still be governed by provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and The Indian Evidences Act, those have not been amended by the Act.