CASE 2

Anand was approached by a trader with a request to settle his sales tax cases favourably. Anand told him that the case is being handled by Ramesh, an officer in another wing of the department. The trader refers to Anand’s friendship with Ramesh and asks Anand to intercede with Ramesh. Anand speaks to Ramesh and the matter gets settled. Sometime thereafter, the trader presents Anand with a costlycamera.

Question

How will you evaluate Anand’s conduct in this case?

1. No fault can be found with Anand’s conduct.

2. Anand is guilty of violating the official code of conduct.

3. As Anand did not directly help the trader, there is no harm in his taking the camera.

4. As the camera was presented after the trader’s work was done, no mala fides can be attributed in the matter to Anand.

Discussion

Alternative (1) is incorrect. Anand is in fact guilty on two counts. First, he interfered in a way in the official work of his colleague. He used his influence with Ramesh for helping the trader. Normally, officials are not supposed to do so. Thereafter, he accepted a gift from the trader. He is guilty of corrupt practice.

As explained above, the second option is correct. By accepting the costly gift, Anand has violated the code of conduct.

The third answer choice is incorrect. Although Anand did not directly help the trader, he has used his influence for helping the trader. Even otherwise, he cannot take expensive gifts from individuals other than close family members.

Thefourthoption is alsoincorrect. So long as an officeraccepts a costlygift, it makes no difference whether he takes it before or after an event.