war LAW COMMISSION OF INDIA TWENTY NINETH REPORT ON PROPOSAL TO INCLUDE CERTAIN SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC OFFENCES IN THE INDIAN PENAL CODE 1966CONTENTS Pasa. Sunpect-warren Pros $e Tnrnooverony 13 GeualsoftheReporr sk ae 4 Refeeneto Law Comino 2 $ Macritenied . 3 \wasre-Coutan Carrs 6 Whtecolwrcines nr) 7 Reker of whitecolaresime. - 8 $45. Protem of white-collr crime er) x0 Parsing of tention on white-alar erimesin the West ‘ x Reon why such cine nape punishment}. ‘ 12 Description of white-collar rime” 5 7 13 WhiecolrcrinesinsBthomnmry . : 14-16 White-collar crimes in England . . . i 17 Restrve ade practices : % 18.19, Conspiney oo % 20 Sutherland's saty La 31 -Main speci of white-collar rime a Adulteration of food, etc - . a 23 Racksering (organi crimes inthe USA : 1 24 Whitecllrcximcs by profesional people. a 25 PriwconmollwinUSA . . 3a, 26 Whie-clar crimesntiaesopley sagt Booonue Cans mv Sovaer Rossa be 27-28 Economic crimes in Soviet Russia eee ese eer ue 29 Important species of economic crimes: 5, , 4 30 Dest pens in Ras for etn eonome cimea e 31 Reno forimpaning eu pemty oh 2 ‘Minimum penaltiesPara. ‘No. 3s 36 37 38 rae aaare “a 3s ea S253 55-56 559 o 6265 on 818 iv) Suspect-MATTER Some satin pins a othe provisions in Bagland U.S.A. and So- Position in Commonwealth countries. ‘Mans Ponsrs To Be CONSIDERED —GmvmAaL OBSERVATIONS ‘Example of Guest Control Order cited : Character of specidsumtes Multiplicationofofences = 5 eee Criminal Law and Morty. 6 eee Line ofdivision thin 5 ee ye ee Function of criminal Jaw and moral law compared Analysis of antieocisletc, offences... ANALYSIS OF SPECIAL EMACYAUNCTS ‘Analysis of special enactment Special penal provisions 5... Mesreamodiied +. 2 1 ee Analysis of kinds of memrea 5 ss Strict ibility fo 06 Koowledgeofilegiy whherrelemm =. nglish cases on mens rea under paricularstamtes =. Offences underthe Customs A ee (Offences under the Foreign Exchangt Act...” ‘i Clacton of oes in question wit fe to meus rea Liability of office of companies =. ss Viewioustibiliy =... ee Modification by same. . eee Vicarious liability-an aspect of strict abiliy . 2. Object ofthe analysis regarding mensrea ys Special rules evidence. oe Tmporanc of delegated legion in lat to tury ote Peas 7 8 8 8 9 5 23 25 as@ Pua Suopecr Maran Pras ee 7 Pembisbynies 2 eee aD 78 Specislpowers/ ss et : #8 79 Special provisions as tosanetion ©. es 8 8% Provisions for publicity, 5 es es et AB Br Special character of the enactments ss ss 4 82 Pomsibilty of new offenors in furs - 83-84 Likelihood of new devices comingintoexitence . - + + 44 85-89 Genesis of special enactments oe tos 90 Alterations ia the Indian Penal Code by special enactments. = 47 or “Special” enactments dnd problems déatt with by them. 6 5 AT CATEGORY 1.—Orrences Pruwmriic Eoonomtc DEVELOPMENT 92 Offences preventing economic development (Category 1) «s+ 47 193. Other economic crimes mentioned by Sanchanam Committee. - 48 94-95 Whether adoption of economic crimes from Bastern Burope feasible o 96-97 Points suggested in comments 5. ss . #8 CATEGORY a—Evaston ano Avonancs oF Tax 98 Evasion, ete. oftax(Caregory2). = ee ee 8 9-100 “Evasion” and “avoidebce” ee st ror-106 Attitude towards jax ayoidance in England © ss 2 ro7-109 Incerpretation of taxing Acts. ro Avoidance not always fraudulent =. 2.6 G 56 rit Views of Courts in India an to avoidancs sss Pa 112 Methods ofcheckingevtsiom 2s eT 113 Existing provisionsanayved se eT. a1g Transfer of existing provisions notfeasible. . 0. + SB 115-117 Placing provisions as to evasion in the Penal Code =. ss SB 118 Question of enactment of general provision as to tax evasion consi- 119 Additiomofnew provbion 5 ee ee azo Points suggested incomments 2 se ee rar Avoidance howtobewcled =. 0. ee te ee(wt) Pana. ‘Susject-MATTER Pros No. CATEGORY 3.~Misuse oF PusLtc Position sy PUBLIC SERVANTS 122 Misuse oftheir positon by public servant (Category 3) 123 Existing provisions analyred 324 Misuse without benefit. . oO ci : eo mas Poimsmaisedincomments |... oe (CATEGORY 4.—Detivany of Goons Nor int ACCORDANCE WITH CORTRAGE 126 Delivery, ete, of goods notin accordance with contmact (Category 4) 127 Existing provisions analysed 28-129 “Cheating” and delivery of goods, etc. 6s ag0131 Meaning of“deception” =... ee 132 Point of implied representation academic 7 : 6s 133 Attempttocheat eee 6s 134 Complicity of officers and offenders 2... we 6s 135 Postion in English Law 65 336 Kinds of malprctices ae ca ssf Erowieed vector eats ese) ea tes ee 138 Points suggested incomments 2. : or 159 Proposed section moto be enacted witout considering Uikly reper a CATEGORY 5.—Homnmne axo Prorrrmmanc 1go Hoarding and proftering (Category 5). se OF aqr Existing provisionsamalysed =. se wee 142-143 History of legislation relating to control of essential commodities. 68 144 Points suggested in comments Se 5 5 6 a4s— West Bengal Act poe ke 146 Addition of new provisions. 69. CATEGORY 6—ApuLTmariOn 147 Adulteration 6050 348 Existing provisions 0 s4p-150, Transfer not feasible 3 . 1st Addition of new provisions #8(vii) Supecr-MATTER Pros 132 Adulteratonand publicopinom . , eee 1s3-155 Failure of prosecutions. =... ky oR (CATEGORY 7.—THEFT AND MISAPPROPRIATION OF PUBLIC PROPERTY AND FUNDS 136 Theft and mistpproprition of public property and funds (Category 7) 72 157 Transfer not feasible B 458 Addition of new provisions 0900 6 0 b 159-160 Provision proposed for theft of public property B 161 Points suggested in comments 1.” CATEGORY 8.—Tearrtoxmec mi Licences 162-163 Trafficking in licences, parmit, ee. oo ee 364 Meaning of “ralficking” and points suggested in comments. 74 165-168 ‘Trafficking to be dealt with by special enactments + 8 ‘Concxusion i6y-171 Problem ofcrimeacomplexoie 6... ww eG wa Appendices ee APPENDICES Aprmout1-—Enxisting stantory provisions regarding offences calculated we event of out te conc oro of he ‘country and endanger ite economic health n ‘Armor, 2—Exing nattry provision epding cmon ¢avldance of Tax or duty and the consequent penal 86 Anrmos $start en ie Sper ee ‘various statubes . ° 100 Armesor 4.—Existing samiory provisions reacting ofenee in the ‘of beac ‘of contacts fesultg in detivery of foods not according to pendcaons tor Arrrwnx 5—Existi isons ax co Hoarding and Black- s—Rxiing samnory pro ing APrevom 6.—Provisions mating to, adukeration of fod and drugs ‘the penalties provided therefor. : 14 APPR 7.—Esining statutory provisions as 10 Theft and Matppro- 7 prion of push rope and funds es(wilt) emo 8.—Fxiting statutory provisions relating to tacking im Tiences, permits, et [Avrevoxt.9.—Provisions of the Defence of India Res, 1962—rlevant for atalogous {0 the offences in q¥esuon Avrovox 10—List of Central Acts pertaining to anti-social offence, ‘ther than the offences sted bY the Semthanam Com Arrexoot 11—Provisions of the, Tacome-Tax_ fet 1061, (43 of 1962) referred t0 in the Report of the Committee on Prevention, of Corapron, age 371 (middle) ab ofering scope for “Avrexowx 12,—Summary of certain points as wax evasion tt dis- fussed in the Repor of Tncome-tax Tnvestigation Com fission, 1949 presided over by Shit Vi “Avpenon 13-—Points 2s t0 Evasion and Avoidance discused in the ‘Report of the Taxation. ‘Commission (1983-5 Areesom 14-—Sumpary of se pegs made in Ten Tax Refora a Kaldor” Department "of Teonomic Affairs, of Finance, Government of India (1956) ‘Tax Evasion—prosecution in Tadia for—(Extracts from Report of the Direct. Taxes ete. Commitee) Arpocom 16,—Exiges from the Criminal Coe of Hungarian People's Republic, 1962. Appenpne 15: APPENDIX 32-—Proposed amendments to the Code of Criminal Pro Cee cs oo cad Phar 16 137 138 at a 14s 4s 7 161 162 163 169 M5 a 1 m8 189 194 196 201 208 arr 21aINTRODUCTORY 1. The circumstances in which the preparation cf this Genesis of Report was undertaken may be briefly stated. The Gov-" ernment of India appointed in 1962 a Committee to review the problem of corruption and to make suggestions' on various matters connected therewith. One of the terms of reference of the Committee was, “To suggest “changes in the law which would ensure speedy trial of cases of bribery, corruption and criminal misconduct and make the law otherwise more effective”. Dealing with this, the Committee? made the following observations:— “72 The substantive law relating to bribery, cor ruption and eriminal misconduct is contained in the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, the procedural Jaw in the Criminal Proce. dure Code, Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1958 and some special rules of evidence relating to such cases in the Prevention of Corruption Act. The working of the relevant provisions of these, enactments in prosecu- tions in courts and also at the stage of investigation have disclosed that certain changes in the law are re- quired in order to ensure speedy trials and more effective results. We have examined the existing Provisions in the Light of experience “gained in numerous cases, and also in the context “of social changes and economic objectives which have created new problems. “73. Amendments to the Indlan Penal Code The Indian Penal Code was enacted in 1860, and though it has been amended here and there, its main structure has continued intact during the last 100 years and more. Tt ig an admirable com. pilation of substantive ariminal Jaw, and most of its provisions are as switabbe today as they were when they were formulated. But the sociat and economic strueture of India-has changed to duch a large extent, espedially durtog the last 17 years of freedom, that in many tespects the Code does not truly reilect the Weeds of the present day. It is dominated by the‘notion that almost ail major See the Report of the Committee on the Prevention, of Caerupcion, (2964), page 1, para. 11. (The Cominitte ie hereafter referred ep ame a eras FCT "Os the ‘See the Report of the Sandhanam Commitee, pege 2, para 1-2 and page 53, Pee pi Deen ‘Report of the Sunthanain Cimatitch, mle. 6b, paras, 7-3 wd frie the Repart2 crimes consist of offences ‘against person, pro- perty or State. However, the Penal Code does not Geal in any setiafactory manner with acts which may be described as social offences having regard to the special circumstances under which they are committed, and which have now become a domi- ant feature af certain powerful sections of modern society. 2 The Report? of the Santhanam Committee broadly categorised the offences as follows: (1) Offences calewlated to prevent or obstruct the economic development of the country and en danger its economic health; (2) Evasion and avoidance of taxes lawfully im- posed; (8) Misuse of their position by public servants in raking of contracts and disposal of public, property. issue of licences and permits and similar other matters; (4) Delivery by individuals and industrial and commercial undertaking of goods not in accordance with agreed specifications in fulfilment of contracts entered into with public authorities; (5) Profiteering, blick-marketing and hoarding, (6) Adulteration of foddstufls and drugs; (1) Theft and misappropriation of public property and funds; and (8) Trafficking in licences, permits, ete.” 3. The Committee then went on to observe": “Some of these offences have been made punish- able by special enactments. We are of the opinion thal it is destrable to add 4 mew chapter to the Indian Penal Code bringing tagether ‘all the offences in such, special enactments and’ enting them with new” provisions so that all ‘offences will find a promi- nent place in: the general eriminal. law of the country. It is a matter for the:Government to consider whether this work should:be undetiaken by a special legal committee or referred to the Law Commission.”. Reference to 4, The Government? decided, that the matter should be Lay.Gom-" considered by the Law Commission, and referred the "Report of the Si OES Sip Ste PNET ‘Report of the er adi @ ene eee Mininty Of He ET3 above proposal of the Santhanam Committee to this Com- mission’, ‘as the revision of the Indian Penal Code was under the Commission's consideration. That is the genesis of this Report. In view of the importance of the matter, we decided to deal with it separately from the general revision of the Indian Penal Code. 5. In order to facilitate our consideration of the sub- ect, we have studied the various special enactments rela- ting to the offences in question’, the penal laws of several other countries’, and the literature available on the sub- ject, including ‘the Reports of several Committecs', A study of the judicial decisions relating to these offences was also made, in order to find out whether the existing provisions relating to these offences are not adequate". The proposals of the Santhanam Committee were cir- culated by us for comments to State Governments and High Courts, and several other persons and bodies, We have considered each one of these comments in detail. The important points made in some of the comments will be dealt with in the Report under the relevant categories? Warre-Coutar Crmers 6, From the discussion in another part of the Santha- nam Committee's Report’, it would appear, that the Com- mittee attached great importance to. the ' emergence of offences and mal-practices known as “white-collar” crime. ‘We quote the relevant portion:— 2.18, The advance of technological and scientific development | is contributing to the emergence of “mass society”, with a large rant and file and a small controlling elite, encouraging the growth of snonopo- lies, the rise of a managerial class and intricate institu- tional mechanisms. Striet adherence to a high stand- ard of ethical behaviour is necessary for the even and ‘honest functioning of the new social, political and economic processes. The inability of all. sections of society to appreciate in full this need results in the emergence and growth of white-collar and economic ~ crimes, renders enforcement of the laws, themselves ~~" not sufficiently deterrent, more difficult. "This type of "Pam. 3 ra. ‘ce Appendices 110 8. ‘Pasiaty, Engand, Assia, Canada, New Zalan, United Sates of Ameri, Sovet int, Hussy, Nomen, Wetaaean, Unie ‘See Appendices 12,13, 14 end I, ZA part ofthe maeil studied by us willbe found in some ofthe ‘pendices to this Report, a ange Paragraphs 38, 76, 96, 97, 120, 125, 136, 138, 144, 164, and 168, "Report of th Santhanam Cimamftes pape. ip pus 3:19 asd 2-74. Materiat wudied. ‘White-Cotler crimes,erime is more dangerous, not only because the finans cial stakes are higher but also because they cause irres parable damage to public morals, ‘Tax-evasion and avoidance, share-pushing, mal-practices in the sharé market and administration of companies, monopolis tic control, usury, under-invoicing or over-invoicing, hoarding, profiteering, sub-standard performance of contracts of construction and supply, evasion of economic laws, bribery and corruption, election offences and mal-practices are some examples of white-collar crim “2.14 Corruption can exist only if there is some one willing to corrupt and capable of corzupting. We regret to say that both this willingness and capacity to corrupt is found in a large measure in the industri and commercial classes, The Tanks of these classes have been swelled by the speculators and adventur ers of the war period. To these, corruption is not only an easy method to secure large unearned profits, but also the necessary means to enable them to be in position to pursue their vocations or retain their posh tion among their own competitors. It is these persons. who indulge in evasion and avoidance of taxes, acct mulate large amounts of unaccounted money by vari. ous methods such as obtaining licenses in the names of bogus firms and individuals, trafficking in licenses, suppressing profits by manipulation of accounts avoid taxes and other legitimate claims on profits, accepting money for transactions put through without accounting for it in bills and accounts (on-money) and under-valiation of transactions in immovable pro- perty. It is they who have control over large funds and are in a position to spend considerable sums of money in entertainment, It is they who maintain an army of liaison and contact men, some of ‘whom live, spend and entertain ostentatiously. We are unable to believe that so much money is being spent only for the purpose of getting done quickly. It is sald that, as a large majority of the high officials are incor ruptible and are Ultely to react strongly against. eny, direct attempt to subvert their integrity, che liaison and contact men make a careful study of the charme- ter, tastes and weaknesses of officials with whom they"~ may have to deal and that these weaknesses are, then, exploited. Contractors and suppliers who have per: fected the art of getting business by under-cutting, of ‘ making good the loss by passing off sub-stand works and goods generally spare no pain or expend!> ture in creating 2 favourable atmosphere. Possession. of large amounts of unaccounted money by various Persons including those belonging to. the industrial and commercial clases is & major impediment tn be purification of public life. If anti-corruption activi are to be successful, it iiust be recognised that it is as5 important to fight these unscrupulous agencies of cor- Tuption as to eliminate corruption in the public ser- vices. In fact they go together.”, 7. The above extract! from the Santhanam Com Relevance of mittee’s Report seems to indicate, that many of the offen- white-collar ces which that Committee had in'mind were crimes usual. ™ ly known as white-collar crimes, We, therefore, proceed to discuss the problem of white-collar crime in detail. 8. In recent times the problem of white-collar crime Prrblem of has received considerable attention. "“White-collar White-colur crime” has been defined approximately as a crime com- mitted by a person of respectability and high social status in the course of his occupation’. The emphasis is on the connection with occupation. ‘The commission of a crime of this category is facilitated by the office, calling, profession or vocation of the individual concerned. White-collar crimes, thus, exclude crimes like murder, adultery and intoxication, even if committed by people of the upper class, since these have nothing to do with their occupation. 9. The object of those who had drawn attention to the prevalence of white-collar crime was to educate the publie about the harm caused to the society by such crime, and to point out that these crimes should bear the same’ moral stigma as acts regarded as crimes according to the ortho- dox notions. It was pointed out®, that one of the reasons for the differential implementation of the law in the area of white-collar crimes was the “relatively unorganized resentment of the public” towards such crime. The reasons. for the absence of such reseatment were stated to be as follows*:— (@) The violations of law in such cases are com- plex, and can be appreciated only by experts; (b) The public agencies of communication (like the press) do not express the organised moral senti- ments of ‘the community, partly because the crimes are complicated and cannot be easily presented as news, but probably in a greater degree because these agencies of communication are themselves controlled by businessmen involved in the violations of many of these laws. (c) The Jaws for the regulation of business belong to a relatively new and specialised part of the statutes. Para, 6, supra, ‘Sutheoland, White-Colla Crimes (949), page 9. See ato Sutherland and Cressey, Principles of Criminology (360) pase 40. ‘Sutherland, Whlte-Collar Crimes (949) Dage 49, “See Sutherland, White-Collar Grime (lo4s), pages 50-51.‘Focusting of __ 20: Attention was focussed on the problem of white- sttention on Collar crime in England and the US.A. after the First white-ottar World War, when it was realised that losses resulting from crimes in the business frauds far exceeded those from the offences ae against property that were punishable under the orthodox notions of crime. It was the financier, not the gangster, who was the greater public enemy}. As defined by Suther- land, white-collar crime is a “violation of the cfiminal law bby a person of the upper socio-economic class in the course of his occupational activities”. Later, he seems to have added a refinement to the defi- nition, by defining a white-collar criminal as “a person of the upper socio-economic class who violates the criminal law inthe course of his occupational or professional activities?” He pointed’. out, that white-collar crime was more dangerous to society than crimes committed by the members of the lower class, first, because the financial losses were higher, and secondly, because of the damage inflicted on the public morals. The necessity of revising the social attitude towards such anti-social behaviour and perceiving its dangers was Pointed out by various other writers also-*, ‘Reasons why 11. Sutherland also elaborated the reasons why such such crimes crimes went unpunished. “The difference in the im - SR, Pm tation of the criminal law is due principally to the difference in the social position of the two types of offenders”. Because of their social status, implementation of the crimi- nal law in relation to white-collar criminals becomes diffl- cult. They are more powerful than the traditional criminals “Consumers, investors and stockholders are unorganised, lack technical knowledge and cannot protect themselves” "Thurman Arnold, Folklore of Capitalism, page 276. ‘See Dictionary of Socology edited by Fairchild. (Vision Pre (ag) under “criminal White-collar"y Gonibuted Oy Bis See Antals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciencet (September, 1941), Vol. 217, page 112, ‘See also Sutherland, ““ White-collar Criminality", (1940), American Sociological Review, pages 1, 4. See Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, ‘September, 1941), Vol. 217, “Crime im the United States ™. ‘See also paras. 12, 19, 24, infra. See Sutherland, “ White-collar Criminality", American Sociological Review, (1940), PaBE 1, DASE 8. "Bmbezzlement is an exception to tis.White-collar crime, it is stated, goes undetected because it “transcends the visibility of ordinary cheating practices of small merchants”. It can, however, be gathered from reports of investigating committees ot from conversation with intimate friends*, a 12. That white-collar crime is essentially connected with social status has been brought out in the following descrip- tion given by a writer on Criminology’ “White-collar crime is most distinctively defined in terms of attitudes toward those who commit it. White collar crime is definitely made punishable by law. It is convictable behaviour. However, it is generally | re- garded by courts and by sections of the general public as much less reprehensible than crimes usually punished by our courts, which may be designated “blue-collar crime”. Blue-collar crime is the crime of the under-privileged; —_ white-roljgr crime is upper or middle-class crime. "Just what proportion or section of the populstiog must condone this type of behaviour to eonstitute it as white-collar is not, and perhaps cannot be. clear. Many courts and other authorities clearly distinguish between a man who illegally misrepresents. the qualities of his products and a burglar or robber. ¥et the very existence of the law penalizing the fctmer type of act indicates an adverse attitude toward it, though ordinarily not of the same degree. The fact that white-collar crime is punished in Jess degrading ways than “ordinary crime” does not iply that the former is petty. Actually society loses huge sums through white-collar erime. Some of the rackets we described m an earlier chapter are white. collar erimes; some are not. As Sutherland defines the term, most racketeering by officers of a labour union would not be white-collar erime; nor, apparently would the vice racket be: so detined. ‘Thus neither in terms of class status, business activity, attitudes, nor degree of seriousness can white-collar crime be wholly separated from other crime. Nevertheless, it is the somewhat dis- finctive attitudes and policies toward the offender in such cases which have been given significance in discus- sions of white-collar crime.’ It appears that even ont- side of ousiness circles, whit crime is less. re- prehensible than ordinary erjme, because low-class people often aspire «© be white-collar criminals. Or if not, they at least aecent the same individualism and the same value of materialism which the middle and upper classes accept. White-tollar crime is attractive because Xt brings material rewards with little or no loss. of status. ‘Reckless, The Crime Problem, (1959, page 206. “Gy. Suthesland, Crime in inet American Ac a a ta spose "Te and England, Chim e0-201. 47 Law— a Description of white collar erime,White-colar Bch century. White-collar England. 13. Problems similar to white-collar crimes had arisen a8 far back as the 18th century. The “South Sea Bubble” led to the Bubble Act of 1720', which may be cited as example of an effort by the Legislature to deal with /-aud on a big scale perpetrated by unscruplous persoris-". Bu? the varie- ties of such crimes and their diverse manifest’ ‘ions were seen more acutely after the First World War. 14. Certain species of white-collar erime have received ial attention-in England. One example is, “share-push- (victimisation of the public by fraudulent dealings in stocks and shares). Legislation penalising this mal-practice was enacted in 1939873, ‘There are similar provisions in the Company Law in India’. 15, Another example of legislation relating to. white, collar crime in England was the Prices af Goods Act, 1939, under section 1 of which it was unlawful to sell any goods the price of which was regulated, at a price exceeding the authorised price”, 16. Taxation frauds have been regarded as an impor- tant kkind of white-collar crimes, and Legislatures in all countries have been constrained to go on adding more and more stringent provisions in the law relating to taxation, as so to bring within their net transactions which, under the pre-existing law, were nat taxable. The problem as- sumed importance ‘in England in the forties. For the present purpose, it is not necesbary to discuss in detail the difference between “tax-evasion” and “tax-avoidance”™. ‘The former is a breach of the law, while the latter raises only ethical questions. 'The Bubble Act, 1720 (6 Geo. 1, c. 18). ay ot, Gower, Moder Company Lev (1957 (1969 Impresin), pase Ss ii oe el aa aan See Report of the De ‘on, Share-pushing, ap- pointed by We Prdese of he Boned & Trade Ggp), Coal a ‘Prevention of Frqud 1939 (2 and 3 Geo. 66. x laerrepaced by the Act of 958 EY Hi ea age SS TO ‘See Gower, Modem Team, (1957) (1963 Impression) pages 285-286, forthe AGE tops, “or a summary of importa cases om the Act, sce Not i ‘Modern Law Review 781-784 By BWM. Downey: "See alo analysis in Rv. Rael (1953) 1 WLR. 77, 79, 81 cea casts, of te Companies Aas 1956 (tf 1950, ne deceive oximiskading srtmen, emt Oy my pon Wingy ‘or recklessly to induce any other person to buy, ctc., shares. ” a eres te we tod Serves rie Coun oat Gh 5 Gear 6850p whiehySnrbe cure, wos sepeted by Ras, Sos and 1553- rh it “See park. 99 «te (1960) 24y 11. Other types of activities on which attention has been Restrbtive focussed in England in recent times are restrictive trade imei. practices’, though the legislation on this subject? isnot $0 widely framed as “anti-trust legislation” in the United States of America 18. Apart from these statutory provisions* there is the Conspirscy. ‘common law offence of “conspiracy”, in England, the ‘scope and application of which may be wide enough to cover many fraudulent transactions not covered by speci- fic criminal statutes, We may quote the observations of Fitzgerald J. in one of the leading cases on conspiracy®:— “A. conspiracy consists in the agreement of two or more to do an unlawful act, or to do a lawful act by unlawful means. By the’ terms “illegal” and “unlawful”, it is not intended to _ confine the definition to an act that would be in itself be a crime or anoffence. They ex- tend to and may embrace many cases in which the purpose of a conspiracy, if effected by one person only, would not be a criminal act; as for instance, if several persons combined to violate a private right, the violation of which, if done by one, would be wrongful bu: not in itself criminal. If, for instance a tenant withholds his rent, that is a violation of the ight of his landlord to receive it, but would not be a eriminal act in the tenant, though it would be the violation of a ti But ‘if two or more incite him to do that act, their agreement so to ineite him is by the law of the land an offenee.”. He further observed, “Conspiracy has been aptly des- cribed as divisible under three headst.— ey “where the end to be attained is in itself a crime; coher te eon foe ata niet cme: a class, though if that injury were effected by a single "For as , see Sit David’ C “ Monopolies and Restrictive pct ERR Be Seo Meera wa Heine Commission on the Press (1od2), (md. 1811). Pon Sar ee Ey RL PR oa, Cae Ona eg is rac A 996 te Ree eG SDs te ae eee Rv, Parnell and others (1881), 14, Cox, C.C, so8,, Fitzgerald J (uish Qaten's Bench Divinon). "See"Twher and Armitage, Cases of Comin ‘Law, (969), page 173. “rh apy wa fe in Cf, are. Tad Gp, wv. vateh Tea Ail Three We ge eeSutherland’ study. ‘Main species ‘otwhite. foliar crime. w individual it would be a civil wrong but not a crimf nal; and where the object is lawful, but the means to be resorted to are unlawful. ! The law of cons- piracy is not an invention of modern times. It is part Of our common law; it has existed from time imme- morial. It is necessary to redress certain classes of injuries which at times would be intolerable, and which but for it would go unpunished.”. 19. In the United $tates of America, the expression “white-collar crime” was made current ’ by Sutherland’ Certain other authorities had also pointed out the damage to society from the upper socio-eeonomie groups which ex- ploited the accepted economfe system to the detriment of ‘the masses*-*, 20. In his book “White-foller crime‘” Sutherland exa- mined the criminal activities of 70 of the biggest corpo- Tations in America, ang focussed attention on the follow- ing types of law-breaking by them:— (1) Restraint af trade. (2) Misreprosentation in advertising. (8) Infringement of patents, trade marks and copyrights. (4) Unfair labour practices. (6) Frauds in business. ‘Thereafter, several other studies and rts have come Gut in the USA. on the sybject Pe 21, The main crimgs that have attracted attention in the U.S.A. under the head of white-collar crimes may be summarised as follows: (a) frauds in business, in relation to sale of bonds and investments"; (0) adulteration of food and drugs, and mislead- ing advertisements! ‘'Sutherland, “ White-collar Criminality”, American Soci Review (February, 1940), pages I--r3, see “See Barnes & Teeters, New Horizoss ja Criminology (1959) puge 4¥- *ee alo pars 10, pra. ‘tBawin HL. Sutherland, Whit ime * etki e-cler Crime (1945) Dryden Press +E, g. Hartung, “ White-collar Crime ; and its significance in thec and practice’ (1953) 17 Federal Probation 31. ad “Cf. Barnes & Teeters, New Horizons in Criminology (1959), page 45- sorKalis & Sink,“ sogconeno Gale Pigs” ew Yor, Vents, veogtn Lam The Ameen pate a Haron i Yok, Fa,u (c) mal-practices in the medical profession, such as “illegal sale of aleohol and narcotics, abortion, illegal services to underworld criminals, fraudulent reports and testimony in accident cases, extreme cases of unneces- sary treatment, falfe specialists, restriction of compe- tition and fee-splitting™; (@) crimes by lawyers, such as guiding the crimi- nal or quasi-criminal activities of corporations, twist. ing of testimony to give a false picture, fake’ claims (bogus liability in accidents), ete2-*; (e) trusts, cartels, combines and syndicates, ete, formed to combat competition, of to raise prices or other ‘wise to interfere with the freedom of trade to the detri- ment of honest businessmen or the consuming public, This has now become a branch of the law by’ itself and is usually dealt with under the topic of “Anti- trust legislation”; () bribery and graft by public officerst, 22. Adulteration of food and drugs has received exten- Adulerstion ‘sive consideration in the United States of America®, of foal, et along with the question af drug addietion and sale of narco. tics, such as opium, and several Acts have been enacted on the subject’. ‘The latest of the Acts, the Federal Narcotics Control Act, 1956, besides penalising the addicts", also punishes those who handle nareotics for profit and exploi- tation. For sale of heroit* by @ person over 18 to a person under 18, death sentence can be awarded under the Act of 56. 23. Another topic which has received special attention Racketeering in the U.S.A. is “organized crimes”, ie. crimes wherein the (organized iratitional criminals join hands with big business for secur- Sf¥e2 ing. ends harmful to the community. Literature on this subject is abundant? This is popularly known as “racketeer. Sagan Whitney", Amero Soil Revie Eom, ows ge, sa, Bares & Tess, New Hoon in rime (1959 ues 4p and "Reine, Crime im Ameria (is) page 57. ‘sec “Crime in Amen” by ats Kefaver, Caan ofthe Sent tins Thvnteting Commitee "Cake 19s0" "Mane a) (as C98, oes sand 66 outStgyFetrl Fond, Drag an Coxmetic At (195) 67 award Law vite ‘Se the Maron am-Nacov Act 115 Goat opium); ke ‘Mariana Tex Act, 1937. and the Federal Nurosice Contra Ae ash "Fora stmmary, se Bars & Tete, New Horan in Cosine cosh ee "Hea, fis sae, ¢ ing stoner than ori, may ead -eriminal behaviour. See’ Mabel Eliot, Crime in Modern: Secteur ela) Gis ase rs “Foran antl, se Tes oie Cie in Amel, (6 pe sted by the Ua Skig or MieWhite-coer Srofesial Biope Price control laws io USA. 2 ing” (organised conspiracy for exploitation)’. Such activi- ties, itis stated, may be indulged in by businessmen, leaders of organised labour, politicians, criminals or even lawyers, but the purpose is exploitation of commerce and the public through circumscribing the right to work and do business. These do not, strictly speaking, fall within “white-collar crime”, because the “under-world” takes an active part’. They might, however, encourage or give rise to white-collar crimes (for example, corruption in the police). 24. As regards white-collar crimes by lawyers and other professional people, the following observations of Senator Kefauver! are relevant:— “In Chicago, too, we gathered evidence of a disturb- ing phenomenon that we found repeated in other large cities of the country. T refer to the active particips tion—amounting almost to subsidization—in gang affairs by a certain clement of lawyers, accountants, and tax consultants, As Judge Samuel Leibowitz, of Brook- lyn, an outstanding jurist, remarked in his testimony at our Snal hearings many months later, “There are minal lawyers and lawyer criminals”. Judge Leibo- witz said it was one thing for a criminal lawyer to defend his client honestly and squarely and to see that he got his day in court according to our laws and our Constitution, but it was “another thing to be in the ire of some gang to advise the gang how to operate, and to be at the beck and call of the gangster or act as his right-hand man”, Nation-wide disclosures on this particular problem were so disturbing that the Senate Committee felt it would be desirable for local bar as- sociations everywhere to take a new look at how the canon of ethics supposedly governing conduct of mem~ bers of the bar was being heeded. On the federal level, we felt it would be wise to tighten up the regu- lations regarding standards for admission of attorneys permitted to practice before federal courts and other Inited States judicial bodies.”. 25, The question of violation of regulations relating to prices, rents, and rationing has received detailed consi deration in the U.S.A. Regulations relating to price control were issued in the USA extensively during and after the Second World a “Hower and Becky, “sath Cemary Grins" in Goya 34 Polteat Quarter ‘Review, Now's hepiadcd a yin * Gapased> Ghee Rens 96 pe "Of. Mabel Elliott, Crime in Modern Society, (Harper) (1952), page a. 'Kefmver, Crime in America (1959), page 57. ‘Sep Clinard, Csi’ Vielations of Waris: tans’ Foe0) "ameicin SSoebat Wb, 258500 one Te page 26.8B The office of Price Administration was the main agency charged with the implementation of these regulations. Apart from criminal prosecutions, action in other forms sould be invoked against violators of such regulations in various forms, such as, warning letters, monetary settle- ments, damage suits, suits for injunction and license sus- pension proceedings. Damage suits are of three types, first, suit by the Administrator for violation in the course of trade or business; secondly, suit by the Administrator for violation at the ‘retail level; and thirdly, suit by the consumer himself. In the first two cases, money paid as the result of the monetary settlement or suit is not deducti- ble asa business expetise for income-tax purpose. ‘The maximum amount of damages is laid down by law. ‘An interesting feature disclosed as a result of the study of such crimes was, that the whole-sale dealers considered imprisonment to be a far more effective penalty than ines}, 26. We have dealt with white-collar crimes at length? with reference to the importance which they have assumed in some of the Western countries. We are not unmindful of one important fact, namely, that they are a peculiar feature of an acquisitive and affiuent society. Our society is by no means affluent, but it is gradually becoming acqi sitive, particularly in the urban areas. While white-collar crime may sot exist in this country on the scale on which it seems to exist in England and in America, it is not totally absent. Corruption of administrative officers, eva- sion of tax (narticularly income-tax) by persons who fall in the higher income group, smuggling of goods which are scarce in this country (such as gold, watches and transis- tor-radio sets) and deliberate breach of foreign exchange regulations, may be cited as instances of white-collar crime in cur country, Further, the problem assumes worse proportions when town populations pass the million mark. The power to influence and the power to corrupt, and ail the other evils associated with those powers, may not, at present, exist on the same large scale in India as in’ other more pros- Perous countries. But, with rapid urbanisation, these evils are bound to grow in’intensity. That there is a marked association wetween crime and urbanisation is recognised in respect of crime generally’, and in respect of the crimes with which we are concerned, it must particularly be so. ‘See Clinard, “Criminiological ‘Theories of Violations of Wartime Regulations, (r946), American Sociologia Review 258, 260, footnote ro-and page 264. WParas. 7 t0 25, supra, ft itt “Sand el Cee, Pinot Shits, (1960), page 156. White-comar ‘amlucat soaiery.a Econontic Cates in Sovier Russia actises in connection with, busines, profes mes" sion and offi, thus, seem to have received special treat- See” enh hela aad inthe Ulted Statss at America? " On the other hand, in Soviet Russia, the subject of ecoio- mie crimes has Tecelved special consideration’, Economic 27, Mal 28. Many acts which would not, be criminal in other countries are regarded as crimes in Soviet Russia. The sub- ject of “economic crimes” has received a most detailed at- tention in Soviet Russia and in other countries of Eastern Europe. Criminal law is viewed as political weapon and as an instrument of policy*, Apart from “counter-revolutionary crimes®, (which are of a political nature), acts and types of behaviour like in- efficient management, poor work, neglect of duties by an employee, non-performance of contracts and inefficient use of one's property, are penalised. Provisions as to economie crimes have existed for the last 40 years, and recent legis- lation increasing the penalty for such offences in certain eases and even impoging the death penalty*, would appear merely to carry on the policy reflected in the earlier pro- Hae 2 he number of “economte erimes” as known to Soviet Zenomic’ Penal law is large, and some, of them, such as “counter- Sime. Tevolutionary crimes” and “crimes against public administration” seerh to partake of a political character. : As these are not felevant for our present purpose, we shall ‘confine ourselves only to the species which are purely Of an economie character, of which the following may be noted:-~ (@ Maoutie- The prohibition agains! manufacture of clothes, under- Biting, “‘pro- wear, knit goods, hats, leather footwear goods, and urticles Size’ PY" made of non-ferrous metals, etc., being an essential feature of the economic policy, provisions were enacted to penalise the manufacture, ete., or sale of such prohibited products" “7 Paras, 14 to 18, mupra. vtec oan inowowae “Sn Gy mn, ta cay s0S 06, Gorm a Sie Uns, pa a me Bera, a te Sit, noma he ina can i, haa unm eecee sere "Sa Gc, Grog ine Ss a 9 * G&G, Government, exe, m the Soviet Union, page 9st.ry “Speculation'"—purchase and sale of goods and other (i), Seu objects with the intention of making a profit—is punished’. Dissipation by a leaseholder or trustee of legal entity (ii) Cont- (corporation) of governmental or public property given to faci, with him under a contract is punishable, So is failure to per- ence" form an obligation arising from a contract made with governmental or public office or enterprise, if, during @ Civil trial, the malicious character of the failure to perform is established®. Violation of laws on nationalisation of land, committed in (iv) Private the form of overt or concealed purchase, sale, gift,.etc., of ‘tnsaetion, plots or land not allowed by law, and other transactions in {ynd."= violation of such laws, are punishable’. “Pseudo-co-operative” activities, Le. founding or direct: () private ing the activities of pseudo-co-operatives (organisations business, which are disguised under the form of a co-operative in a order to secure privileges granted to co-operatives, but which G38." are in fact private enterprises), is iable*. tive, Release of products of poor quality, or of products in- (vi) Products efficiently completed or released in violation of the estab- Of poor lished standards, is regarded as an anti-State crime equiva: ™*'" ent to sabotage.” The directors, chief engineers and chiefs of divisions of techn'cal supervision of industrial establish- ‘ments are punishable for such offences*, Mismanagement by a person placed at the head of g°v- (vii) Poor emmental and public offices and enterprises or of those en- mansgé#tent. trusted by them, pased upon a careless or dishonest atti- tude to the affairs entrusted, resulting in dissipation or icreparable damage to property of the office or enterprise, is punishable. So is dissipation of governmental or public pro- perty, particularly the entry into unprofitable business transactions by a person directing a governmental or public office or enterprise committed by agreement with the party to the contract of such office or enterprise’. Giving faulty weights or measures to customers, using (vi) Weight rong seales or measurement devices or weights, is ‘punish: snd meres able™, +6 .& 6, Goreramen, cc in the Soret Unlon, pues 955 *G.& 6, Gommmen, ec, inthe Sort Union, pags 956. * 6 & ©, Government, et in the Sot Union, pest 957 and 958. + & G, Goverment, te. inthe’ Sort Union, pase 957-958. $6 & G, Government, cy in the, Sov Unlon, pages 958 and 999, #6 & 6, Government, tin th Bove Onion, page 939.16 (ix) Selling. Selling goods of inferior quality at the price for those of fonds of it” superior quality is punishable as theft from the customer and fraud of the Soviet State’. () Excessiv® Violating established retail prices for goods of mass prices, consumption in shops, stores, stands, eating places, etc, and concea'ing ‘rom customers the Prices of goods. indi cated in the price list, are punishable as theft from the con- sumer and fraud of the Soviet State!, (a Theft of ‘Theft of public property is dealt with elaborately in publ” Soviet Criminal Law. Broadly speaking, theft of Govern i ment property is punishable more severely than theft of “public, property” (proverty of collective farms, co-opera~ tives, ete.), and theft of public property is punishable more severely than theft of private property, Recently, even the death penaity has been introduced for large-scale theft ot State property or social property committed by dangerous Teeisivists or persons serving sentences for special er:mest. (in fact, even previously under the law of August 7, 1932, misappropriation of goods shipped by rail or water, | Gov: ernment property or property of collective farms and _co- operatives was punishable with death. This position con- tinued “up to 1947. ‘when the death penalty was generally abolished on 26th May, 1947. From that date. confinement and confiscation of property were substituted for theft of public property’), ews pesaky 30. Since the penalty of death can now be awarded for anSussia fr certain offences in Russia, it may be useful to summarise ‘micctimes” the important provisions on the subject. ‘The death penalty was abolished im Russia m 1917, reintroduced some months later. in 1918, re-abolished in 1920. and again re-introduced in 1920, i.e. in the same year. In May, 1947, it was abolished again, but in January, 1950, it was re-introduced for certain serious crimes (enemies of the regime, traitors, spies and subversive-diversionists). In 1954, it was extended again to murder under aggravating circumstances. This position was. repeated in the General Principles of Criminal Legis- lation, laid down in 1958. Thereafter, in 1961-62, it was extended to certain economie erimest-*, G & G, Government, etc, in the Soviet Union, page 959." +6 & 6, Government, acy inthe Sovke Onion, pape 90. + Dee of sth May, 96h, No. 19/207. 1 G8 G, Govemnmeny ty fm the Soviet Union, ‘pag: 960, For the text of ihe lw af 947, hed i pagen Sor and pea, 1 Sem 1} G & G, Government, ete, in Soviet Union, pee 998 ex come gio Foi aa 46, ass ei a 54 Pas 35 (i “Homomie Crips ip the Soviet Union”, December, 1964), Voi", joule he Taman” Commision ot” Sats wena nae “cog Se en ee itpascemes hig 1a 31, It has been stated, that the extension of the death penalty in 1961 and 1962 ‘to various economic crimes re- Nects the determination of the Soviet regime to take ex- treme measures against those who most flagrantly violate the tencts of Communist morality. Some of the salient points that have been emphasised* are, that Soviet law— (i) xegulates ail aspects of economic and social life; (ii) remains a law of planned economy; and (iii) remains a law whose primary function is to discipline, guide, train and educate Soviet citizens to become dedicated members of a collectivized and mobi- lized social order. 32. An interesting feature of the Soviet Criminal Code which came into force on the Ist January, 1961, is the dis appearance of minimum penalties in many cases*-*, 33, On the basis of the brief discussion attempted above", we venture to draw certain general conclusions as to white-collar and economic crimes in the countries con- cerned, First, in England and in the U.S.A, an emphasis has been placed on “white-collar crimes” (such as, frauds by corporations, manipulations in the stock exchange, com- mercial bribery, bribery of public officials, tax frauds, pro- fessional and business rackets, etc.). But, in. the Soviet Russia and other countries of Eastern Europe, the emphasis, placed has been on “economic crimes”. In fact, having regard to the sozial and economic complex of those coun- tries, the importance of white-collar crimes (crimes bY persons of the upper strata), seems to be limited. Secondly, the importance attached to each species of white-collar and economic crimes has varied from time to time, While one species of white-collar erime, such as pro- fiteering, ussumes importance at one stage, at another stage it might pale into insignificance, and another species of white-collar crime, such as tax fraud, might come into pro- minence ;Thirdly, there is no common factor binding white- collar crimes as known in the West with economic crimes as emphasised in Eastern Europe. ~ 3 Harold Berman, “Soviet Law Reform”, Harvard Law Review (March 1963), 995: 948- "Harold Berman, “ Soviet Law Reform”, Harvard Law Review (March 1963), 929, 930 and 931. + "Feldbrugae, “Soviet Criminal Law, The Last Six Years”, Journal of Griminal Tay Ceiminology and Police Soleo (September, $49, 255 Fighihand column Sen aol “For a gqneral view, 5. 4+ Fundamenals of Soviet Gein Cot Gy 35 Mode ny Rowe's. © Pare 6-32, supra. Ped iba! Reasons fom. imposi death om Minimem penalties. Some stlient: pointe as t0 the provi- song in iw SerieAddition of -new provi ‘slons. 18 Fourthly, there is no common characteristic behind the economic crimes penalised in Eastern Europe, except that they share the common characteristic of all crimes, namely, acts universally deapproved of by members of the society concerned’. 34, We tried to ascertain, as far as possible, whether provisions of the nature contained in the Soviet Criminal Law* are in force in the Penal Codes of Commonwealth countries. For this purpose, we made an attempt to study in detail the Penal Codes of Canada, Australia’ and New Zealand, and the material available as to certain other Commonwealth countriest.*. We were unable to trace such wide and sweeping provisions in the laws of those countries, or in the law of England®, POINTS TO BE CONSIDERED—GENERAL OBSERVATIONS _ 39. We now proceed to consider the main points arising from the proposals of the Santhanam Committee. The pro- posal of the Committee" is to add a new chapter to the Indian Penal Code bringing together “all the offences in such special enactments (te enactments relating 10 the offences in question) and supplementing them with new provisions”. Thus, it seems to contemplate two classes of changes, namely— (3) transfer to the Indian Penal Code of the existing provisions relating tg the offences in question, con tained in other special enactments; and (ii) addition to the Indian Penal Code of new pro- visions as to social (and economic) offences. 36. So far as the question of adding new provisions is concerned, no detailed suggestions were forwarded when the matter was referred to us (except the recommendation made by the Santhatam Committee)*, But certain sugges- tions were made in the comments received by us on the pro- Fossls under consideraien. "The important points made in those comments will be considered later in this Report, under each category, at the appropriate place? ; “Gf. Duskheim, Division of Labo in Society (English camaation by SSP Eat et yam nen, il Paes "Pa. 2600 3 pre rare Simi ow cole ts Quen, Weve Ata sarge, Nils snd Slogyort—The Dewopmen of ele Laws ae ‘A. De Smith, The New Commonwealth and its Constitution, e MSc so Appeals 9, 23, 26 8 nd 3 2 Pan. 3 a * Bema 10 ma + See parerans 38, 74 o-frh 14d, tas, 196 128 tds 6 ase, infra.w 37. We shall, later, discuss in detail’ how far changes in Genertob. the nature of transfer of existing provisions, as well as addi- Pr tion of new provisions, is necessary and convenient in re for'usdgier lation to each of the vatious classes of offences mentioned by the Committee. But, as to transfer of existing provisions, there are certain points of a general character which we would Iike to state at the outset. In the first place, the penal provisions contained in various special enactments are, in. many cases, linked up with the general structure of those enactmen's, ang take their colour from them. ‘Their tcans- fer to the Indian Penal Code may be inconvenient, if such transfer has the effect of disturbing the whole scheme of those engctments and making them unintelligible or in- complete. Conversely, if transferred to the Indian Penal Code, these provisions themselves would become incom- plete, as they would then have to be read without refer- ence’ to the ‘main provisions of the special enactments. Secondly, their transfer will not oaly increase the number of sections in the Penal Code and add'to its bulk, but also mar its structure?, 38, The correct approach to the problem seems to us to Correc. have been well expressed in a comment which we received *PProsch- from one of the High Courts on the proposals under. consi- deration. We quote the relevant portion in extenso?:— “In their Lordships’ opinion, the proposal of the Committee to include these anti-social offences in the Indian Penal Code does not appear to be practicable, and, if followed, will create innumerable ‘diculties, apart from marring the structure of the Penal Cude. ‘Their Lordships further observe, that the Indian Penal Code deals with such acts against persons and ‘their property as are universally accepted as injurious in all civilized sociaties and (with) acts which offend against the fundamenta) principles on which (the) existence of human beings as. a society rests. These fundamentals are more or less of a permanent nature, and will endure for.a long time to come, In their Lord. * ships’ view, the offences dealt with in the Indian Pena Code are of a different nature, and have a different con- tent, from social offences, and it would not be proper to include anti-social offences in the Indian Penal Code. The preamble of the Indian Penal Code also shows that it was intended to be @ general Penal Code for India, It was never intended, as section 5 of the Act shows, to affect any speeial or local law by the enact~ ment of the Penal Code, ‘The Opium Act, the Gambl- ing Act and a number of special and local Jaws were T Pana 98 os fa. — * Gf. Para. 38, infra. . * Punctuation marks have beeh added a! far piecesPermanent offences ‘nd tempo- ary mal- practices. 20 and are in force, which not only constitute but also punish some types of acts under circumstances men- tioned therein, and that method of dealing with offend- ing acts of a special nature or acts which require to be specially considered and dealt with, has been found to be working satisfactorily. Sometimes, while dealing with particular offences, it has been found necessary to provide for particular procedure or special rules of evidence also. Provisions for special sanction before starting investigation and prosecution, for raising pre- sumption of guilt, for awarding minimum. sentences, etc, have been made in some special enactments, eg. Prevention of Corruption Act, Prohibition laws, ete. The Penal Code, besides ‘giving its own general explanations, definitions and general “exceptions, divides into and deals with categories of acts constitut: ing offences on their basie nature, eg. offences against the State, against public tranquility, offences relating to public servants, affecting public health and morals, affecting the human body, offences against property, etc. Most of the principal offences defined and made punishable under the Penal Code have, unfortunately, continued to be tommitted and punished, but, except in a few cases (almost negligible), the ‘occasion to delete any of them as obsolete has so far not arisen. On the othe: hand, offences of new and complex types have come to the forefront, the'pature and the number of the ‘offences constituting the basic structure of the Penal Code remaining ‘unaffected. ‘These offences have now ‘assumed such proportions that it has become necessary to deal with them on a more scientific basis and to in- ‘corporate them into the pénal law of the land. But, as, stated before, such offences require special treatment and procedure in their trial, and, in their outer forms, are short-lived, though they reappear in different and perhaps more complicated guises later on. These offences being the outcome of changed and changing social conditions, would require repeated legislative attention, and therefore, (it would be appropriate if they are made the subject-matter of special legislation While the penal law of tho land, ic. the Indian Penal Code, should be left substantially’ in its present form.” 39. As has been pointed out in one article!, some offences go against the fundamental structure of the society, On the other hand, there are some activities which are regarded as offences because of q temporaty dislocation of the economic structure. “Statutoty offenees mainly belong to the second category, They are intended to counter-act passing pheno- mena. ‘So long as human life is considered of value--and i be eternally so—. taking away human life would be consi- dered a crime. On the other hand, if things return to 1965 SEE, ER Oe. Oe 7 Ge Raa normal, there will be no necessity for any Guest Control Order or for the matter of that any Control order.”. 40, As regards the argument that courts attach more Exagple of gravity to offences mentioned in the Penal Code, it has been Guest Cone Stated'—“An offence of, say, entertaining more than 100 "01, Order guests in violation of the Guest Control Order cannot be looked upon by anybody as an offence as heinous as rape, even if it is enacted in the Penal Code os section 376. 41, Such offences are better left to be dealt with by Chamacter of special and self-contained enactments which supplement special stu the "basic criminal law". We would, in. this ‘connection, © like to quote the following observations of Stephen®:— “Before undertaking either of these tasks I must endeavour to define what I mean by the Criminal Law. ‘The most obvious meaning of the expression is that part of the law which relates to crimes and their punishment—a crime being defined as an act or omis- sion in respect of which legal punishment may be inflicted dn the person who is in default either by act- ing or omitting to act. This definition is too wide for practical purposes. If it were applied in its full latitude it would embrace all law whatever, for one specific peculiarity by which law is distinguished from morality is, that law is coer- cive, and all coercion at some stage involves the possi- bility of punishment. This might be shown in relation to matters altogether unconnected with criminal law, as the expression is commonly understood, such as legal maxims and the rules of inheritance. A’ judge who wilfully refused to act upon recognised legal maxims would be liable to impeachment. The proprietory rights which are protected by laws punishing offences against property are determined iby the application of those laws.. If there were no such crimes as theft, forcible entry, malicious mischief, and the like, and if there were no means of foreing people to respect proprietory Fights, here would be no auch thing as property by law. This is no doubt a remote and abstract speculation, The principle on which it depends may be displayed by more obvious and important illustrations. It would be a violation of the common use of language to describe the Jaw relating to the celebration of marriage, or the Mer- chant Shipping Act, or the law relating to the registra- tion of births, as branches of the criminal law. Yet the statute on each of these subjects contain a greater or Ge ‘Calcutta Weekly Notes (No. 14), 1900 Sea Be iy Notes (No. 14), page 57 (@th February {Sie Hino 0 4 ihn Hin, 88, Vo pe2 less number of sanctioning clauses which it is di to understand without reference to the whole of the acts to which they belong. Thus, for instance, it is felony to celebrate marriage otherwise than according to the provisions of certain Acts of Parliament passed in 1823 and 1837, and these provisions form.a com system which cannot be understood without reference to the common law on the subject. These illustrations (which might be indefinitely multiplied) show that the definition of criminal law suggested abave must either be considerably narrowed or must conflict with the common use of language by including many parts of the law to whieh the expression is not usually applied.’ 42. The observations of Stephen relating to summary offences may also be quoted':— “Such offences differ in many _ particulars trom those gross outrages against the public and against individuals which we commonly associate with the word crime. It would be an abuse of language to apply such a name to the conduct of a person who does rot sweep the snow from his doors or in whose chimney a fire occurs.” Muliplce 43. Recent years have witnessed growth in the volume Bion of fle gf “criminal law and the intensive multiplication of ‘offences. Some of the offences with which we are concern- ed seem to belong to a class which cannot be equated with the class of offences dealt with in the Indian Penal Code. This is an aspect well worth elaboration. We quote the following passage from the Encyclopaedia of Social Sciences*:— ‘Treason, murder, certain sexual offences and some serious offences against property are fairly constant in the criminal laws of the world, with relatively similar definitions. In addition to these offences, however, the increas- ing complexity of social life has ied to the creation by the State of a vast number of Jaws which strike at forms of conduct peculiar to some particular type of social organisation. Roscoe Pound, in his Criminal Justice in’ America, bas found in analysing the criminal laws of | Rhode. ‘Island the Revised Public Laws of 1852 defined $0 atimes, while the title of “Crimes | and Pua ” of the general laws of 1923 defined 212. More than half of the offences that may be prosecuted by the Btate and punished by fine and imprisonment ot both are contained in special lows pee {SPHEN Histor of the Cem Law of Baglnd (85), Volar "The reference ia to “ suramary of police offences". poae Pose RL EEE BEI Eg Beene Yoh +23 passed since 1872, dealing with such problems as the protection of workers, the regulation of motor vehicle traffic, the regulation of selling of securities and of merchandise and the enforcement of liquor prohibition laws...” ‘Only the most serious offences against the law ‘cause a Stigma to be attached to the offender. Were it otherwise, the psychic burden of criminality carried by the average community today should be immense, for the multiplication of legal prohibitions has made it difficult for any one of its members to lead a completely law abiding life. 44. Even as regards. acts of an anti-social character Crimina! tow belonging to a class which can be regarded as “unethical” it should be borne in mind that every act which is regarded as immoral cannot be made criminal. The question of the relation between law atid morality is a vexed one, and we need not enter into a detailed discussion thereof". Stephen's observations on the subject, however, seem to put the sub- ject in a proper perspective, and may be quoted": — “The first point then to be considered is the nature of the popular and the legal conception of crime in general, their relation to each other and the inference which the existence of that relation suggests as to the nature and objects of punishments. The great difference between the legal and the popular or moral meaning of the word ‘crime’ is, that rc they Perea deta eine which Invyerat nach fo theword that are or ane push by Ine he pala gr noe coseton adds to this the notion of moral guilt of a specially deep and degrading Kind "Sys canfouh peo ie nese understand not only a person who’ is liable to be punished, but a person who ought to be punished because he has done something at once wicked and abviusy iui ing hgh deme ihe comeones interests of society, Perhaps the most interesting ques- tion connected with the whole et how far these views respectively ought to regulate legislation on the subject of crimes, ‘ought’, meaning in this instance how far it is for the good of those whose good is con- sidered in legislation that the view in question should be adopted, and ‘good’ meaning the end which the legislator has in view in his legislation. In other words, the question is, what ought to be the relation between. criminal law and moral good and evil as understood by the person who imposes the law? Zggghire so Ort teint of Mow, one em Sethe, soya he Cini La ef Fag, (8 Ve, 3 a 47 Law—3. ei Mon2 .. In what relation ought criminal law to stand to morality when the effective majority of a great nation legislates for the whole of it, and when there are no other differences of moral standard or sentiment than those which inevitably result from individual _- differences of opinion and unrestricted discussion on religion and morais? ‘The answer to this question is not quite simple. In the first place, criminal law must, from the nature of the case, be far narrower than morality. In no. age or nation, at all events, in no age or nation which has any similarity to our own, has the attempt been made to treat every moral defect as a crime. In different ages of the world injuries to individuals, to God, to the gods, ‘ox to the community, have been treated as crimes, but I ‘think that in all cases the idea of crime has involved the idea of some definite, gross, undeniable injury to some one. In our own country this is now, and has been from the earliest times, perfectly well-established. No temper of mind, no habit of life, however, pernicious, hhas ever been tfeated as a crime, unless it displayed itself in some definite overt act. "It never entered into the head of any English legislator to enact, or of any English court, to hold, that a man could be indicted and punished for ingratitude, for hardheartedness, for ‘the absence of natural affection, for habitual idleness, for avarice, sensuality, pride, or, in a_ word, for any vice whatever as such’ Even for purposes of ecclesi tical censure some deSnite act of immorality was requir- ed. Sinful thoughts and disposition of mind might be the subject of confession and of penance, but they were never punished in this country by ecclesiastical crimi- nal proceedings. ‘The reasons for imposing this great leading res- triction upon the sphere of criminal “law are obvious. If it were not so restricted it would be utterly intoler- able; all mankind would be criminals, and most of their lives would be passed in trying and punishing each other for offences which could never be proved. Criminal law, thén, must be confined within narrow limits, and can be applied only to definite overt acts or omissions capable of being distinctly proved, which acts or omissions infict definite evils, either on specific per sons or on the communjty at large. Tt is within these Limits only that thete can be any relation at all between criminal law ahd morality. The relation between criminal law and morality is not in all eases the same. (a) The two may harmonize; (b) there may be a conflict between them, or (c) thes thay be independent. In all common cases they do, amd ipany opinion, whergvery and 0, fas its poset they. ‘ought to harmonize with, and support, and other.”,45, Sometimes, notwithstanding that an act is immoral, Ziae 9¢ it may be necessary to put it outside the criminal law thin. ‘Decatise it is difficult to enforce a law punishing it. The ‘abservations of an eminent judge' are of interest: — “The line that divides the criminal law from the moral is not determinable by the application of any clear-cut principle. It is like a line that divides land and sea, a coastline of irregularities and indentations. ‘There are gaps and promontories, such as adultery and formieation, which the law has for centuries. left subs- tantially untouched. Adultery of the sort that breaks Up marriage seems to me to be just as harmful to the Social fabric as_homo-sexuality or bigamy. The only ground for putting it outside the criminal law is that a law which made’ it a crime would be too. difficult t0 enforce; it is too generally regarded as'a human weak- ness not suitably punished by imprisonment. All that the law can do with fornication is to act against its worst manifestations; there is a general abhorrence of the commercialization of vice, and that sentiment gives strength to the law against brothels and immoral earn- ings. ‘There is no logie to be found in this, The boundary between the criminal law and the moral law is. fixed by balancing in the case of each particular crime the pros and cons of {egal enforcement in accordance with the sort of considerations T have been outlining. 4€. The same eminent Judge* has made the point about Function of ‘the proper function of the criminal law, as compared with ctimiaal law the moral law. in these words!— pagers pared “| have spoken of the criminal law as dealing with the minimum. standards of human conduct andthe ‘moral law With the maximum. The instrument of the criminal law is punishment; those of the moral law are teaching, training, and exhortation. If the whole dead weight of sin were ever to be allowed to fall upon the law, it could not take. the strain.”, 47. In the course of our deliberations, we tried to analyse Anslysis of ‘the common characteristics of the offences in question’. oop, | ‘Many of the offences seem to have the following features in ‘common:—— (a) the offences are committed by the upper classes of society; ()) those upper classes themselves set. the moral standards of society, and hence a serious view is not taken of these offences: Chee. "Para 2, supra.26 (c) the victims of the offences are unascertainable persons (usually, the State or the community), as contrasted with the majority of the offences under the Indian Penal Code, where, in most cases, the victim is an ascertained individual, But all these features are not shared by each of the offences (e.g. theft of public property and offences relating to taxes). Moreover, some of the offences—eg. theft of public property—are, even now, punishable under the Indian Penal Code. Awatysis or SpzcrA ENACTMENTS Aninisof _ 48. What we would like to emphasise is, that most of the Specal, special enactments dealing with ‘these offences' possess Ensciments. some special features, and we Proceed to state some of these special features. ‘These special features are briefly, special penal _provi- sions, provisions modifying mens rea, provisions relating to liability of officers of companies, vicarious liability, special rules of evidence, penalties by rules, special powers, special provisions ag to sanction, provisions for publicity, and similar provisions which illustrate the special character of the enactments*. Special penal 49. We begin with one feature found in many of the provisions. enactments, namely, the existence of special penal provi- sions. ‘These seem to take various shapes— (a) There may be “Departmental” penalties (penalties which can be imposed by officers of the Department), as in the Income-tax Act and similar Acts, in the Customs Act and in the Stamp Act. (b) Again, action by way of confiscation of goods can be taken, an example of which is section 3(2) of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947, read with the relevant provisions in the Customs’ Act®, (©) Even in respect of the traditional penalties (such as imprisonment or fine), some of the special enactments contain specigl provisions. By way of example, we may refer to provisions relating to conti- nuing offences'.*, provisions enhancing the powers of ‘Magistrates in respect of finest (for offences under tlie special enactments), and provisions for enhanced Para. 3 mre _ ‘See paragraphs 49 10 815 infra. Af. PLN. Roy, ¥. Caller of Quton, AIR. 1957 S.C. 64, 650, pers . ‘Sco section 24 (1), Industries Development and Regulation) Act, 951 5 of 1950 a ae *As wo continuing pfentes,’ eq dibfumion In Musicipal Council v. Rawat Ram, ALR. 1964 Ralf 1b) | Jet ‘See section apA, Trfiusties ¢ snd Regudation) Act, 1 (6s of 1950).27 punishment in respect of subsequent offences, e.g. section 16, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act! (@) Then, revocation or amendment of licences may be provided for. An example is section 12(1) of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act,’ 1951. (e) Lastly, penalties may be provided for, not in the enactment, but in the rules made thereunder. ‘Thus, ules made under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, contain extensive penal provision“, In our opinion, if certain penal provisions of special enact- ments are removed while other provisions are allowed to continue in the special enactments, then the inte- grated scheme of the special enactments would be des- troyed without any compensating advantage 50. It should also be noted, that the enactments relating Mens sea to some of the offences under consideration modify the re- modited. quirements of mens rea, thus standing in contrast with the Indian Penal Code. 51. For'the present purpose, it is not necessary to ana- Analysis of lyse in detail the various special Acts in order to show how kinds ef the mens rea, i.e. “some blameworthy conditions of mind™ ™" "2. hhas been modified. But some broad points may be indicated. While dealing with mens rea, it would be convenient to group* the various crimes into tour classes— (®) Crimes in which the mens rea* is found in an intention to commit en illegal act. (General intention). is re in English Law, burglary is house-breaking by night with intent to commit a felony). ‘of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (G7 of 1954). 'See State v. Badri, ALR. 1965 Raj. 152, paracLt2. *The Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1981 (65 of 1951) 1Gf, slo section 3 (3) read ith section, 219). Industries (Develoy- ment nd Regastony Ace 195 Tos oF 990. a "Gf. A. A. Beeravoo ¥. Collector, te, (1968) 2 Ct. L. J. 279 (Kerala). ‘See also para 77 infra. 'Of. Cave J. is Chisholm v. Doulton, (1889) 22 Q.B.D. 736, 741 {The grouping is based on that given in Stephen, Commentaries onthe Laws of England '(19$0), Volu4, pages 10a" ‘*Stephen’s criticism of the expression “mene rea” will be found i. ‘his judgment in Rev. Tolson, (1889) 23 Q’BD. 168, 185, 187. ‘Knowledge can also Of. Rev. Haden, 2 WAR. ge cos Cai Sa Maa a Law hn GE * Pat fet a tie xisStrict Tability. 28 (iii) Crimes in which negligence will suffice (e.g. management of vehicles in public streets); (iv) Crimes in which the requirement of mens rea is redured to a miniaum (ie. abducting a girl under 16 {rom her parents, though the gir is believed to be above 16)*. ! 52, But, beyond these examples*, lie the cases where the legislature’ has absolutely forbidden the commission of cer~ tain acts under penalty of fine (or imprisonment in default of payment of fine), apart, altogether from the question of mens reat, That the liability so created is of a quality Gifferent from that attaching to ordinary offences requiring mens rea is now well-recognised by the case-law and ex- tensive literature that has grown around these offences. It is not necessary to deal with these offences of “strict ligbi- lity” at length. As has been said, striet responsibility “has been with Us s0 long that it has become accepted as a necessary evil”, At the same time, a brief discussion is not out of piace. 53, In this connection, we may quote the “following observations of the Privy Council in a recent case*: “Where the subject-matter of the statute is the re- gulation for the public welfare of a particular activity— statutes regulating the sale of food and drink are to be found among the earliest examples—it can be and fre~ quently has been inferred that the legislature intended that such activities should be carried out under the conditions of strict liability. The presumption is that the statute or statutory instrument can be effectively enforced only if those in charge of the relevant acti- vities are made responsible for seeing that they are compliad with. When such a presumption is to be inferred, it displaces the ordinary presumption of mens rea. Thus sellers of meat may be made responsible for seeing that the meat js fit for human consumption and it is no answer for them to say that they were not aware that it was polluted. If that were a satisfactory, answer, then as Kennedy, L. J., pointed out in Hobbs "For he paseo purpose, ki aeemed tat aealiesnes ea pe of me rea," Bor "conrasy view, vee Glanrile Willams, Crimizal aw—‘The toca Bar ge, wee iof and ae fers onbreeme act, SEPA Bil Gti Stal Rete GO) 79 LOR 330 1 v. Price, (1979) LR. 2 CGR. 154 Par. 5h more sagt STC Comment te La of Brand (95, Vl 4 7. J, Pigerld, in, Block Revjew of Colin Howard, Strict Respons (6) 7 Laver t ai di ve “iim Chin Aik TH 160 5 (0963) 1 ARR, aa BEE Oude, they Abc 260+ cops) am:29 vy. Winchester Corporation’, the distribution of bad meat (and its far-reaching consequences) would not be effec- tively prevented. So @ publican may be made respon- sible for observing the condition of his customers*.” In other words, these are cases in which—“Intention to commit a breach of the statute need not be shown. The breach in fact is enough’-*.”. 54, The passages quoted above! have been discussed at Know! length in a recent decision of the Supreme Court of India®-* of leaty which also deals with the question, how far mens rea in iswer, the sense of actual knowledge that the act done by the accuse was contrary to the law, may be requisite. Tt was pointed out there, that “starting with an initial presumption in favou of the need for mens rea, we have to ascertain Whether the presumption is overborne by the language of the enactment, read in the light of the objects and purposes of the Act, and, particularly, whether the enforcement of the law and the attainment of its purpose would not be rendered futile in the event of such an ingredient being com sidered necessary”. On the other hand, where it cannot be said that the object of the Act would be defeated if mens rea is read as an ingredient, courts would be slow to dispense with it?. 55. Examples of reduction or elimination of mens rea English case are abundant in the case law in England regarding the Food 98 mens rea and Drugs Act,'-’-"-" and the Weights and Measures Acts! under part- Hobbs, x. Winchester Corporation, (1910) 2 K.B. 471. *Cundy v. Le Coeds (1884) LR. 13 QB.D. 207. 10f, Lond, Wright in, MeLead.v. Buchanan (i940) 2 All.” England Reports 179, 186 HLL.) (Case under s, 35, Road rath Act, 7930, requiring Sinsurance against third party risk) ‘See also para 59, infra. ‘Paragraph 53, supra. ‘State of Maharachira v. M. H: Georges ALR. 1965 8.0. 722, 736, can patoerapb 39" to as and 34 (Majoos Jaden 7 “Of, Natal v, State of M. P. ALR. 1966 S.C. 43 45, para. 451 cr. LJ. 11, 73+ 966 ‘Williams, Criminal Lav, The General Part, (1961), page 218, para. 77. Craies, Statute Law (1963), pages 540 and s4s. \Hfalsbury, Laws of England, ard Edn., Vol. 37, pages 484,485, para. ‘900, 901, and page 506, para. 937- See case-law reviewed in Hobbs, ee... Winchester, (1910) 2 K. 478, 480. “cantdasl simran Oi Co ue we oe A908) 1 KB. 596 4h iia! am(Clstoms Act 30 Judicial construction in England of certain enactments passed for protection of the revenue also furnishes similar examples." 56. In India, a striking example of modification of _ the ordinary rule regarding mens rea is the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, section 19(1) of which that (Subject to certain qualifications), it shall be no defence im @ prosecution for an offence pertaining to the sale of any adulterated or misbranded article of food, to allege merely that the vendor was ignorant of the nature, substance ar quality of the food sold by him, or that the purchaser, hav. ing purchased any article for analysis, was not prejudiced by the salet. It has been held®, that under this “Act even the sale of any article to a particular customer on the under standing that the customer is to use it only for animals, is punishable. In England also, provisions of the correspond ing statutes are given a wide interpretation*, 57, Another example of a provision dispensing with mens rea is seétion 167(12A) read with section 52A of the (old) Sea Customs Act‘. ‘The net result of these two provie sions was, that if a vessel constructed, adapted, etc. for the purpose of concealing goods, under section 52A, entered, etc, within the limits of India, the vessel would be liable to confiscation. The mester of the ship was also liable to a penalty not exceeding rupees 1,000. It has been held, that having regard to the fact that this sub-section, as cone trasted with other subsections, did not use the word “knowingly”, ete,, and having regard to the fact that impor- tation of the requirement of mens rea would nullify the object of section 52A (to put an end to illegal smuggling), the prohibition must be regarded as absolute. ‘The guilty mind could rarely be established against the owners of ves- sels which are travelling on the high seas, and it may be difficult to prove the guilty knowledge even of the master of the ship. If absence of surh knowledge was allowed to be pleaded as a defence, the owners and the master could very well plead that the alleged alteration, ete. was made without their knowledge, and it will be almost impossible to establish mens rea in such eases. “Gy, Dav. Hor, (800 LR 9 OB. a. Fe ant ks oe Core a ee tn 125 ae ‘ment in Sherras v. De Retzem, (1893) 1 Q-B. 918, 921. ‘te Preven of Fd Adtortse Aa ie (7 Of 1950 Ge Magaias vs See Mareen Ae ls see ah ars PhP ALR 98 Ma 89 pm 3 Rai “ "The English cases are cited in Kenny, Outlines of Criminal Law (1962)» fe [ae min 5 a, om A 3 of wt ‘ia Toi Set 3 eke 8. Lotsa, ert ae.aL 58. A recent decision of the Supreme Court’ virtually qgenoes éstablishes the same position in respect of offences under upder the the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947' Foreign Be 39. Of course, the question whether the liability under a statute is absolute, is ultimately one of construction of the particular statute, and the answer will depend on the language employed in the statute’, the policy behind it and how far enforcement of the statute would suffer by adherence to the doctrine of mens rea’. ‘The examples cited above are merely intended to show that in relation to some of the enactments relating to. the in question, it would be proper to say, that they < attention on the acts themselves, irrespective of the knowledge or intention’. 60. The above discussion’ will show, that it cannot be Chigiscation asserted that all the eight classes of offences with which of ofenees We are concerned in this Report® stand on the same footing #,queston with reference to mens rea. In fact, the offences seem to Tas fe belong to four different categories. First, there are offerices ment rea. in respect of which mens rea is undoubtedly required (such as theft of public property), Secondly, there are offences which, though requiring mens rea, possess a special charac- ter of their own (eg. many offences falling under the cate- gory of black-marketing). Thirdly, there are offences which can, with a fair measure of accuracy, be described as offences of strict liability (such as, some offences regard. ing food and drugs)’. And, fourthly, there are acts in res- pect of which their moral culpabiliy’is a matter of contro- versy (e.g. tax avoidance)", 61. We may, in this connection, also refer to certain Companies special provisions concerning companies. The subject of State ¥. M. H. Gtorgey ALR. 1965 S.C. 722, para. 49, 41 (May Rem EHF Ctr 965 8.C. 7: 40, 41 (May) "The Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 (7 of 1947). Of. Craies, Stare Law (1963), page 539. “Gf, Mall Broder Lad. LN. Rallea. (917) 2 KB. 836, 845 5 (1916-17) Al E.R” Rep, riot, 1106 (per Atkin) J. ele Se i fa Bf 2 BER es BET REA SS BRT i 0B 2 EER cea tees "Para 5010 59, Pra. Pana. 2, pra. ‘See aluo para. 73, fea A am oe |Liability of coffcers of Sompanies. 32 criminal lability of corporations is interesting one’-", and ‘we need not, for the present purpose, enter into a detailed discussion" of the subject. The subject hes been discussed in detail in England’ In India, the point was referred to, but not decided, in ‘one case before the Supreme Court’. The question has recently been discussed in a Bombay case’. 62. But the provisions that deserve especially to be men- tioned in the aresent context are those which (subject to certain qualifications), treat directors and officers of the company as liable for the offences committed by the ‘company, i 63. An example of such a provision is section 17(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act'’-#, quoted below: “]7(@) Where an offence under this Act has been committed by a company, every person who at the time the offence was committed was in charge of, and was responsible to the company for the conduct of, the business of the company, as well as the company, shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shalll be’ liable to be proceeded sgainst and punished according] Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall render any such petson Hable to any punishment provided in this Act if he proves that the offence wat Committed without his knowledge or that he exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence.”. ’Sce Halsbury, 3rd Edm, Vol, 10, page 28%, para, 32% ; and Vol. 6, pages ‘440 10 442, paras: 455 and 84 dealing wih tBe erimial liability of the com as Ml crim iy a fies, arly pee 4, ‘See also Gower, Modern Company Law, (1957) (1963 Impression), pee SE Tin Bag tne Idi ewes B ¥, J.C. R, Hoult, (1944) KB. su geen Begin ee SR a lS: Se ca cf sapey coment compa} 2 etl) Spe Crimial Tabty of Corporation” 54) 62 LQ. 34. cal on Grime 96) Vee 0 ae 96 ‘Kenny, Outlines of Crimiaal Law, (1062), page 70, part. 50. ee os ‘nr Zomintari Co, v. Sate of Bitar, (953) SCR. 120 5 ALR. wn LOSES, is of Mean’. Syndiate Trawport Cos ATR. 1964 Bem. 19 ee ig ie tporenion of Pod sha: 1954 (57 of 1950. vO FP. KR. Cooperdea MOR pled, AAR. 1964 Mad. 30.33 Similar provisions are found in many English Acts’. 64. As has been observed’, “Recent years have seen a further development whereby the rule “that the acts of: directors are treated as those of the company is, in effect, applied in reverse, so that the acts of the company are treated as those of all its directors. Many modern statutes and regulations provide that if an offence is committed by a company, every director or officer shall be guilty of that offence unless he proves that it was committed without his consent and that he exercised due diligence to prevent its commission”. Such provisions are so Worded as to stop the loophole revealed by vertain judicial decisions" 65, The practice of inserting such provisions‘ has not escaped criticism. The comment of Upjohn J. in one case may be referred to. There the statutory provision in issue was! as follows: — * ....Where an offence’under this Act has been committed by a body corporate (other than a local authority), every person who at the time of commission of the offence was a director, general manager, secre- tary or other similar officer of the body corporate, or was purporting to act in any such capacity, shail be deemed io be guilty of that offence, unless he proves that the offence was committed without his consent or connivance and that he exercised all such diligence to prevent the commission of the offence as he ought to have exercised having regard to the nature of his fune- tions in that capacity and to all the circumstances The following observations were made on this provision’: — “First of all, I have to bear in mind that this is a enal statute, It-indeed, I suppose, represents the \igh-water mark of the Parliamentary invasion of the traditional rights oj the subjects of ‘this realm. Not only does it impose upon offenders substantial penalties —no objection could be taken to that—, but what is so serious from the point of view of the subject is, that where a body corporate has’ been found to be an For English Acts containing similar provisions, see Glanville Williams, ‘Criminal Law, ‘The: General Part, (1963, pager R66) et eg, ‘Gomer, Modern Company La, (1957, (963 Impression), page 138. 3B. Dean v. Hiner, (1942) 2 All. Eng. Rep. 340 (person not di speci a tor ee nde Region 5 tte Bena) ese paitons ara, 6% pra, cglTH Postowing (Control and Guarantees) Act, 1946, Schedule para 3@ ‘Landon ond Company C2 Trcatmenty Ly. Aueragy Gener, 0935) weet tae (312, 318, 319, Gh. DS iEy offender, then every director, general manager, secre- tary or other similar officer of the body corporate, in- cluding a person who was purporting to act in those capacities, is deemed to be guilty unless he proves that the offence was committed without his consent or con- nivance, thereby reversing the usual and traditional rule of English law that a man is innocent until he is proved guilty. But nct only that; for proof that he is innocent will not avail an secused person, because he must fur- ther show that he exercised all such diligence to pre- vent the commission of the offence as he ought to have oxercised, having regard to the nature of his functions in that capacity, and in all the circumstances. How- ever, that is what Parliament has thought fit to enact, and I abide, of course, by it. Nevertheless it is what Mr. Lindon described as a highly penal statute.”, ‘Vizrous 66. The question of vicarious penal responsibility also falls to be considered, in this context. The rule at common. law is that (subject 4o certain exceptions), a master is not vicariously responsible for the crimes of his servants‘, Mogifeation 67, This common law rule may undergo a modification ‘by Satur. in relation to special enactments. The Ifability so imposed may be vicarious either in relation to the actus reus, or in relation to the mens red. ‘The method by which such'modi- fication is achieved is two-fold. There may be statutory provisions creating vicarious responsibility, by using words such as ‘no person shall either by himself or by any servant ‘or agent” do some act’, 68, Besides such statutory modifications’, there may be a modification as a result of judictal construction, "A statute ay be so construed as to render a person criminally liable for the aets of his servants; and, such a construction might io, Rit, Oui of Cnn Law (5625 pas 36 2s 4 48 and *See_dacuson in Glove Wiliams, Criminal Law—The Genex Pac, G96t) Dabs 267 to 26, Ba 98 ane, S Provezers arte in 96 Modern Law Review 236, for w gener Para. 66, supra. "See amples of English fate ted in Glanville Williams, Criminal Law, he General are (i960 Bae 369, oom, inet ‘compare section 9B, Ophum Ac (of 1878), a ineted by Bengal Act 5 of 1933. be See pare. 67, pra |35 be more easily adopted in relation to, special enactments having regard to their subject-matter, This scems to be particularly so in the case of “public welfare offences Vicarious liability for statutory offences is, in many cases, justified on the principle, that if a master’ chooses to delegate the conduct of his business to a servant, then, if the sezvant in the ccurse of conducting the business, does en act which is absolutely prohibited, the master is liable On the other hand, where intent is a necessary element, as in attempt, the doctrine of vicarious liability may be tlega- tived’. The link between vicarious liability and absolute prohibition can be seen in the following observation: “A master who is not participant in the offence can only be liable criminally for the acts of his servant if the statute which creates the offence does so in terms which impose an absolute prohibition.”.” ‘The following observations of Channell J. with refer- ence to a case under the Weights and Measures Act, 1876", illustrate this aspeet™:— “(The Act] is within the class of statutes under which persons may be convicted for acts of their ser- vants in respect of which they are not in any real sence culpable. Mens rea is not an element. in the “For the position in England, see— ae CO Grows anc Jonesy Induction to Criminal Law, 1964, pags i) Kenny, Outlines of Criminal Law (1962), pages 38, 42 and 48, paras, 28, 32 and 35. (Gi Glanville "Wiliams, Criminal Law, the General Part (1961), pages 270—285. 2 *For the position in Australis, see— (0 Proudman v, Dayman and the judgement of Dixon J. therein, (1953) 67 Commonwealth Law Reports, $36, $40.3 (i Phomar vB (2992) $9. Commonweath Law Reports 279, 320, 305 (Dixon 1) (ii) Note by Cotin Howatd in 67 L.Q.R. 547 3 and (je) Colin Howard, Strict Responsibility (1963), Chapter 7. ‘For the position in America, see Perkins Criminal Law, (1957), pages 695 10 697, ‘For Indian case Law sce Ustam Chand v. Emp. ALR. 1945 Lah 238, 246 10 248 FB). ‘See Glanville Willams, Criminal Law, The General Pat 282, middle 'See also Veandel v. Fisher (1963) 3 WLR. 1002, 1007, (per Lond Parker C1). "Gf. Barker v. Levinson (1951) 1 K.B. 342 § (1950) 2 All E, R. 825, 827 (Lord Goddard C.). "Gardner x. Akeroyd, (1952) 2 All Eng. Reports 306, 310, 311 * Gardner v. Aberoyd (1952) 2 All E.R. 306, 310 (per Lord Goddard. c : The Weis an Means As Hp ff ad 2 Vi. tom 25) "Analo-Amarican Oil Ca, Lid. |. Mere 586) 1 K.B. 536, s44e ' ot (1961), page36 ‘offence The offence is within that class where the legislature has absolutely prohibited certain acts being done, with the consequence that if they are done— although by a servant of the employer—done in any sense in the course of the employment, so that for some burposes the maxim qui facit per alium, facit per se applies—the employer may be convicted although he is not in any way morally culpable.”. : 69. As was observed by the House of Lords in a recent sease', the number of statutes which may give rise to the squestion of viearious criminal liability is “regrettably great”, and the language “very far from uniform”. "But the effect of the numerous cases on the subject appears to be, that (subject to certain exceptions), where the scope and purpose of the relevant Act is the maintenance of proper and accepted standards of public order in licensed premises or other comparable establishments, there arises under the legislation what Channell J. called a “quasi-criminal offence”, which renders the licensee or proprietor criminally Mable for the acts of his servants, though there may be no ‘mens rea on Ris part. 70, An elaborate analysis of the methods whereby the ‘statute itself may create vicarious liability is found in the judgment of Lord Morris “It is open to Parliament to provide that a parti- cular act is wrongful and that a person who does the fact is guilty of an offence. In general our criminal law requires that there should be mens rea in order to establish guilt. (i) Parliament may, however, enact that mens rea is not necessary. There may be strict liability. (ii) So also it might be enacted that a person is guilty of an offence if his servant or agent does some act and does it with mens rea. Tt might be enacted that a person is guilty of an offence if some other per- son not his servant or agent does some act and does it with mens rea, It might be enacted that a person is guilty of an offence if there is mens rea either in him or in the person doing the act. (ii) It might be enact- ed that a person ‘s guilty of an offence if an act is done by some other person even though there is no mens rea in any one.”. 1. This aspect cf special enactments creating “quasi ‘eriminal offences” has been thus put by Lord Devlin‘: “The first distinguishing mark of the quasi-criminal law then, is that a breach of it does not mean that the Vane v. Viannopoulion (3964) 3 weekly Law Reports, 1218, raa8 FT et ar sr ee See para. 72 infra. Vane v. Viannepoul, (1969) 3 Weekly Lew Reports, 1218) stg Per to wisfot Bots ies)” Numeral insisting stabs ‘Destin, Enforcement of Morals, (1965), page 30-37 offender has done anything morally wrong. The second distinguishing mark is that the law frequently does not care whether it catches the actual offender or not. ‘Owners of goods are frequently made absolutely liable for what happens to the goods while they are under their control even if they are in no way responsible for the interference; an example is when food is contami- nated or adulterated. Likewise, they may be made liable for the acts of their agents even if they have ex- pressly forbidden the act which caused the offence. ‘This sort of measure can be justified by the argument that it induces persons in charge of an organisation to take steps to see that the law is enforced in respect of things under their control. In some of our colonies where the police force is ‘sparse and_the population scattered, and the detection of crime exceptionally difll- cult, the law provides for imposing a collective fine on a village where there has been disorderly behaviour. ‘That helps to ensure that the inhabitants will keep order among themselves. In England a more refined form of vicartous liability prevails. ‘The majority ot quasi-criminal offences are committed in the course of trade or commerce, and the fines that are imposed in respect of them fall upon the shareholders of a limited company or the proprietors of the business.”. ‘72, Really speaking, vicarious liability in this context is ‘an aspect of strict liability. As has been observed', “By ‘the general principles of criminal law, if any matter is made a criminal offence, there is imported into it that there must be something in the nature of mens rea. Therefore, in ordinary cases a corporation cannot be guilty of a criminal offence, nor can a master be liable criminally for an offence committed by his servant. But there are exceptions to this rule in the case of quasi-criminal offences, as they may be ‘termed—aets forbidden by law under a penalty, possibly even under the penalty of imptisonment, at any rate in default of payment of a fine—because the iegislature thought it so important to prevent the act being committed that it forbade it absolutely to be dene in any case. It seems to me chat exactly the sare principles apply to a corporation doing such a thing. If it does an act which is absolutely forbidden it is liable for a penalty.”. =a 2 ccd Hbility 73. The above analysis of mens rea’, and vicarious crimi- Object of the nal liability*, is not intended to imply that all the enact- analysis ments dealing with the eight categories of the offences "pading *Pearks, Gunsion and Tee Lid. ¥. Ward, (1902) 2 K.B. 1 1) ALELR. Reprint 228, 232 (per Channall, 7) (1902) "Para, 50 to 60, supra, ‘Para, 66 to 72, suprg. ySpecial rules evidence 38 which are the subject-matter of this Report’, create offences of “strict liability”. Many of them do require mens rea. ‘The analysis is only intended to bring out the position, that at least in respect of some of them, there has been a modi- fication of mens rea. ‘The analysis is also intended to demonstrate, that sta- tutes creating new crimes represent the attempts of the Legislature to give effect to the criminal policy of the ‘moment. “The Legislature is therefore primarily concerned to find the best method of dealing with the perticular mis- chief which it is, at that moment, seeking to repress, and its decisions, aimed at a narrow target, are not as a rule reached by any careful regard for general principles of an abstract kind”. Further, it will also show, that “as things are, the sta- tutory crinies, as a whole mass, cannot be brought under a simple schemes of general principles of criminal liability". Representing, as they do, efforts of the Legislature to ropress anti-social conduct of a particular variety prevalent at the particular moment when the Legislature is confront ed with the problem, these enactments, therefore, may not fit in with the Scheme of the Penal Code. A synthesis of the principles on which most of the crimes in the Penal Code are based (on the one hand), and the principles on which some of the crimes dealt with by these special enact- ments are based (on the other hand), would be difficult to achieve. In so far a mens rea is eliminated or modified, these special offences are “quasi-eriminal™ rather than inal 74, Besides provisions modifying mens rea’, and similar provisions there are special rules of evidence laid down in respect of many of the offences in question. An example is section 14 of the Essential Conimodities Act‘, which pro- vides that where a person is prosecuted for contravening any order made under section 3 (of the Act), being an order which prohibits him from doing aay act or being in posses- sion of a thing, without lawful authority or without a per- mit, licence or other doctiment, the burden of proving that hhe had such authority, permit, licence, or other document shall be on him’. Para. 2, supra. *See para. 60, supra "Russel on Crime, (1964), Vol. 1) page 65. Cf Mall «12 NW. Rly Co (992) 2 KB. 836.5 (936-17) AML ER, Rep 1101, 1706, (oe judgment of Viscount Reading Para. 50-60, supra. ‘Section 14, Essent odin Acy 1955 (to of 1955). on ees soho eon evra of oma we, lanile SPRY gto, bon: Oy She ee es39 ‘7. Another familiar example of a special rule of evi dence is section 123 of the Customs Act’, which applies to “gold, diamonds, manufactures of gold or diamonds, watches and other notified goods". Under this section, where such goods are seized under the Act [section 110 read with sec- fion 234], in the reasonable belief that they are smuggled goods, the burden of proving that they are not smuggled goods’ shall be on the person from whose possession they were seized’. 76. It should, next, be noted, that many of the enactments Importance relating to the offences in question cannot be worked with- of delegated Out delegated legislation on a large seale contemplated by Bus” those enactments. This aspect has been emphasised in one Stanory of the comments received by us on the proposals under offences consideration‘. We quote the relevant portion: — “The Indian Penal Code is an enactment which enumerates and defines a series of offences against the State, society in general, the human body and property, besides providing for punishment for each of these offences. Even the codified social offences like those relating to public tranauility, elections, all offences against public justice, religion, ete, are capable of an all-time definition. ‘The oes not provide any delegation of legislative authority to the executive by way of rule-making powers to uary the definitions of these offences. Structurally, the Code is quite different from the various other enactments like the Essential Commodities Act, Company Law, Industries (Develop- ment and Regulation) Act and legislation concerning Income Tax, Custems, Exeise, Import and Export, ete. which can, in general, be called’ social and economic laws. Generally speaking, these enactments, unlike the Indian Penal Code, do pot’ give eomplete definitions of offences. ‘These enactments, besides stating certain social objectives, itcorporate vast enabling Powers to the executive to make rules or issue orders or directions to implement the objectives in a given situation. Con- traventions of these rules, orders and directions would amount to offences which are made punjshable under ‘the parent enactments. Tt ig seen that Government and its officers, exercising delegated authority, can periodically change the ingredients of what can be social and economic offences, depending on the exigencies and needs of the situation, by virtue of the delegated legis- lative powers vested in’ them. With this structural *The Customs Ac, 1962 (32 of 1960). ‘This corresponds to old section 1784, which was enacted inp ine is af he srcommendations made by the Tegan Paap Commission, aa "See Bg /. Colleczor Ther LST SS Fe om Fees ai! vii40 difference, it would be very difficult to define, codify and incorporate what can” be social and economic offences in the Indian Penal Code. For illustration, we may examine black-marketing, hoarding, trafficking in licences and permits, etc. ‘The question of black- marketing arises only when the price of any commodity is fixed statutorily. “Similarly, a person can be said to hoard any article and thus commit an offence only when he hoards more than what he is permitted to, under the law. Necessarily, black-marketing and hoard- ing cannot take place in respect of a commodity when its supply position is comfortable, and when, as a re sult no restrictions are placed. Such restrictions are usually imposed, when necessary, under specific enact= ‘ments, and the circumstances of the case are bound to vary with the commodity and the position prevailing at the time. Trafficking in licences and permits takes place when these are transferred without the permis- sion of the competent authority though such transfers are prohibited by the law, or when a premium is charg- ed on such transfers in spite of a prohibition under the law. Here also the circumstances of the case and the severity of the anti-social activity vary with the differ- ent classes of Jicences and permits, necessitating punishments varying in séverity.”. Provisions are left to statutory rules and orders, because varied and recurring action by way of subordinate legisla- tion is required, particularly in connection with essential commodities. The following points seem to be worthy of notice: — (a) Tt often becomes necessary to issue more than gne order under an Act. By way of illustration, we may refer to the large number of orders issued in con- nection with control of sugar’ ‘These were issued under the Essential Com- modities Act. In 1963, an order on the subject‘ was issued under the Defence of India Rules, 1962. Reference may also be made to orders issued under the Sugar (Regulation of Production) Act’ AThe Sugar (Control) Order, 1955, (SIRO. 1863-Ess, Com., Sugar, guned heat See, p09 80° Dies Sugar ee Alls, Uae India, (1959) 2 SCR. (SWPP) 123 FBT Re 1995 S.C. 626. The Sugarcane (Contra Onder, 1955, (S.R.O. 1863—Ess. Com. Sugarcane, dated the 27th August, 1953). oThe Sugarcane Pretsmud Control Order, 1959 (G.S.R. sst/Es, ‘Com/Pressmudy dated the 23th Apel 1959). 384 5, deed 2 segTHe Sum (Cones rds 98h (GSR 676, et te xh Aoi, "The Sugar (Regilatida of Prpdnion) Act, 1961 (55 of 1h6).4a (®) ven more than one Act may have to, be en- acted to deal with one commodity, e.g. sugar. (c) Changing circumstances _ require | frequent amendments in statutory rules and orders. Thus, the Inter-Zonal Wheat Movement Control Order, i957° was, between 1957 and 1961, amended seventeen ‘times, before it was rescinded Particulars of the amendments are given in the foot- note’. "See, for example— (othe Sugar (Regulation of Production) Ac, 196t (55 of 19615 (ithe Sugar Export Promotion Act, 1938 (93 of 1958); the Supe Como (Ana Poven) Ay 1962 9 of Got Seazne Acts 9948. 1934) Which eon seed Be ae Sines by Wad Gas? (ey seation 4 Sugae (Special Bxcixe Duty) Act, 1959 (58 of 1959) ‘For history of sme of thee searing quer, see Tika Rami ¥, State, (1955) S.E.R. 393 5 ALR. 1956 S.C. 676. "The Inter Zonal Wheat Movement Contral Onder, 1957, (SRO. 1986, dated the 13th Tune, 1957), (Gazette of India Extraordinary, Part 23) page 1985, dated the 13th June, 1957). ‘The Onde wm ended ty $8.0. 30 dated the ih April 96 A fresh onder—the. Intet-Zonal Wheat (Movement) COMES MET Tea lis sued ner GOR sit dated he) 3nd Marcy 4964). The notfetons amending the onders were SRO. 2464, 2708 Jul, 1957 SRO. 3630, 14th August 1957. SRO. 4043 ih December, 1957 (publithed on 21-12-1957) SRO. 39 25th January, 1958 (publbed on 1-2-8) GSR. 346, sth May, 1958 (ublsbed on 10-538). GSR. 243, 15th Apel, 958 GSR. Gop, rah July, 1958 GSR. 652th July, 1958 (publibed on 19-756) COSR. r7r, 1h Febrary, 1959. GSR. 347, 10 March, 1939. “GSR. 64, 27th May, 1939. GSR. 935, ath Juss 1959 (published on 8-55). GSR. 121, 218 Jamar, 1960. (published on 30-140, GSR. 117, 22th September, 1960 (publbed on 24-940). GSR. 1407, 24th November, 1960, : GSR. 9, ged aman, 1969 GSR. 35, 7h Jancy, 196.Penatie Rules, ka Speci Powers e (d) Amendments in an order' may sometimes become necessary in view of criticism of the order made by the Committee on Subordinate Legislation. (e) Further, under an order issued in pursuance of the Essential Commodities Act,? it may become necessary to issue subsidiary orders. ‘Thus, under clause 14(b)(2) of the Cotton Control Order, 1955, more than 4,000 orders were issued in 1958". (J) Again, it may become necessary to add to the very list of essential commodities in the Essential Commodities Act*. This has been done in respect of several com- modities, by notified orders'74-'- ‘The above illustratjons will show, that a degree of flexi- bility is required in regard to conirél over commodities, Which cannot be had ‘under the Indian Penal Code. {7 In connection with delegated legislation", it may be pofnted out, that it may be nepessary to frame rules im- Posing iferent requirements for diferent situations, Ap Sxarple i a rule made under the Prevention of Food Act whereby the spectieafions pigb “Ghee” must conform woke Ba dow diferent oY llderent ayens, having re gard to the fact that the “Reichert” value of pure ghee is ot constant, but is dependent on several factors, such as—what isthe breed of the cattle in an area, whether the Cattle are fed on pasture or on stall, and so on". 78, Another special feature to be noted is the conferment of special powers. An example is section 10 of the Preven- "Se, fe cepa Sh Fg afte Common, Saterdiie regina Ged Bok SiBba) Ge Speen, Tos Pees 2 pan “The Extential Commodities Act, 1955 (10 of 1955). *Sce Commitee on Subordinate Legislation, Sigth Report (Second Lok: Sabha) (och September, 1959), pages 29°21 (Appendix 3), 4th column. ‘See section 2 (a) (), Bssential Cargmogities Act, 1955 (10, of 1955). 95,0, 2332, dated the 13th Septentber, 1960. (Cinema carbons). *S,0, 2896, dated the 8th Sepreniber, 1962. (Non-ferrous metals). ‘Notification No, GSR/Ess. Comm. dated the rsth April, 1959. Pres 8.8.0. B28, ded the th Api 1956. (we. 48.0. 3594, dated the agth “Noverhber, 1962. (Cement). srt lief orden is Seavey Par 76 wore STs Prevention of Fo 2 of 1359 of sae UF wer eR Se hn MSce also para. 49(¢ ome a uae43 tion of Food Act!, whereundet, a food inspector has power to take samples of any article of food from certain persons. ‘As has been pointed out®, without such a provision, the inspectors cannot carry out the duties assigned to them, and the section, thus, is a “pivotal” section. 79. Another type of special provision is a requirement relating to sanction of a particular authority before prose- cution can be instituted. An example is section 107 of the Insurance Act’, under which the sanction of the Advocate- General is required before proceedings could be instituted against insurers or against any director, etc, under the Act’ There is a similar provision requiring sanction of the specified authority for prosecutions under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act’, the Drugs Act*, the Income-tax Act, the Customs Act, and other special enactments, 80. Special enactments sometimes contain special provi- sions intended to add to their deterrent, effect. The most apt illustration in this context is a provision for publicity. ‘Thus, the Australian Act regarding black-marketing’, makes elaborate provisions far giving publicity to convic: tions for black-marketing, When @ person has been con- Yicted of the offence of black-marketing, then, under the ct (i) the court shall require the person convicted to exhibit, outside his place of business, a notice contain- ing particulars relating to thé conviction and to keep 4 exhibited continuously for “not less “than three months; () the court méy requiré bin to print on the invoices, agcounts and letter-headls to be used by such persoh in business, duting a petiod of not léss than three months, a notice regarding his convictiorf, con- taining such particulars as the court determine; (iii) the Attorney-General may direct that the particulars regarding the conviction may be broadcast; "The Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (37 of 1954). 'Narasimharao v. State of Andhra Pradwsh, A.UR, 1964 Andhra Pradesh $01, 503, pars. 14. *Section 107, Insurance Act, 1938 (4 of 1938). As t0 this section, sec Raghibar Singh v. Emp. ALR. 1944 B.C. 25, ‘Section 20, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (37 of 1954)- ‘Section 15 (2), Druga (Control) Act, 1950 (26 of 1950). Section 280, Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961). ‘Section 137, Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962). ‘The (Australian) Black-masfeting Act (4p of 1542) eetons 13, 3. and a4. mi Special prom vision as to sanction. Provisions for publicity.Special cha raster of the ‘enactments. Possibility of new offen fn foture, ‘ot new evi ces com into ex “ (iv) particulars regarding the conviction are to be published in the Gazette, and, if so directed by the Attorney-General, also in a newspaper. Somewhat similar provisions are found in the Act that: was in force on the subject in West Bengal’. Provisions for publicity are found in some Central Acts. also? 81. The features enumerated above’ amply show, that the enactments in question are of a special character, and. stand apart from the general criminal law of the country embodied in the Indian Penal Code. 82, While taking a decision about transferring the "provisions of special enactments to the Indian Penal Code, we should bear in mind a practical aspect, namely, that with the passage of time, new and fresh offences under the head “anti-social offences” will come into existence, and those new offences may, in the light of practical needs, necessitate their own special rules of evidence and proce- dure, as well as special provisions as to maximum and: minimum punishment. The manifestations of human ingenuity cannot be predicted, and special provisions may become necessary to tackle them. On the other hand, it may be that several of the offences dealt with in the special enactments now in force may, in course of time, become- ‘obsolete or lose their importance. In view of these consi- derations, it would be more practicable to keep provisions. relating to such offences in special enactments, as they are at present. In this connection, we may also point out, that besides: the offences listed by the Santhanam Committee’, there are several other offences which could be regarded of an- anti-social character, and that these are all dealt with in. speciat laws’. 83. We would also point out, that with the passage of time, new and fresh devices to evade the existing taxation or economic laws might come into being, and the more convenient course would, therefare, be to deal with thenr in the relevant special "enactments rather than in the Indian Penal Code. ‘Sections 20 and 21, West ‘Black-macketing Act (32 of 1948) (repealed by West Bengal Act 33 of 1954). one kao ha Metin Ae 7 oe scene te Moms does ct eat Re eee ‘See also section 3, Drags and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (23 of 1940). Searae are Seah Esser6 84. As has been stated’, “The race between the evaders of the law and the ‘authorities who enforce the law may, in some fields (like techniques and methods), be one (continwous process, in which each tries to get the better of the other. “In such circumstances, the Legislature , and the Government may try to equip the enforcers of the law at any time vith powers required at that time, consi- dering the prevailing circumstances, the nature and extent of actvities of evaders and extent of power requi- 7 site for the officers enforeing the law, including rules and notifications to deal with the evaders.” 85. We also made an attempt to study the genesis of Genesis of some of the special enactments, and the study bears out Sell what we are endeavouring to emphasise, namely the “iments. “special” character” of the relevant enactments. ‘Thus, the Prevention of Food Adulteration Bill was introduced, for the following zeasons*:— ‘Adulteration of foodstuffs is so rampant, and the evil has become so widespread and persistent, that nothing short of a somewhat drastic remedy provided for in the Bill can hope to change the situation. Only 2 concerted and determined onslaught on this most anti-social behaviour can hope to bring relief to the nation.” Notwithstanding the existence in the Indian Penal Code of certain sections punishing adulteration‘, the enactment of a separate law was proposed, because that was consider ed the only adequate way of dealing with the problem 86. Similarly, the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 Was passed’, because the opportunities for. bribery and corruption had been enormously inereased by war cond tions, and because it was anticipated that post-war recons. truction would involve disbursements of very large sums of Government money. The enactment of a special provi. sion whereunder, possession of a sudden accretion of wealth should constitute an offence was (apart from proce dural changes) the main innovation introduced by the . Act. The section creating the offence was framed in the terms in which it is now found (section 5), because it was felt that the correct legal course was jo ereate a new offence of “criminal misconduct™ {Shecram Dergaprasad (Privatd) Lad. v.D. ©. Cutoms Deparment, ALR. 1965 AP. 294, 302, para. 33 (per Anantanarayana Ayyar 35 (eee Para. 81, supra See Statement of 1, section 3, page $23. ‘Sections 272—276, Tndian Penal Code, SOF, Statement of Objects and Reasons, Part V, page 374 “Cf section 9 (1), Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, 1 section 2 (4), Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, 1946. ae Objects and Reasons, Gazette of India (1950), Part Gazette of India, (1946),6 87. Again, the Railway Stores Act! was passed in 1955 to replace the Railway Stores (Unlawful Possession) Ordi nance?, and to extend its provisions to Part B States. The Ordinance itself was promulgated on the 13th May, 1944, with a view to preventing persons from having unlawful possession of articles of railway stores, a thing of frequent Securrence towards the end oj the last war. The Act creates a new offence of “unlawful possession of railway stores”. The offence is more drastic than theft and allied offences, inasmuch as, under the Act— (i) it is enough if there is a reasonable suspicion that the stores are stolen or unlawfully obtained, and (ii) it is for the accused to account satisfactorily how he came by such stores. 88. The Telegraph Wires Act‘ was enacted’, because thefts of copper wires used in telegraph lines had been 50 rampant, that tele-communications in several parts of the country were considerably dislocated during the two years preceding the passing of the Act’. Many offenders had escaped only due to the failure to prove in court that the wires found in their possession had been stolen from the Posts and Telegraphs Department. Since copper wites used in telegraph lines were of distinctive gauges, it was felt that it would not be unreasonable to presume that any person found in possession of wires of these gauges came into their possession unlawfully (except in the case of persons who purchased them from the Disposal stock). Later, by an amendment in 1952", sale or purchase of ony quantity of telegraph wire [as defined in section 2(b)] Was prohibited except with the permission of the prescrib- ed authority. 89, Similarly, the Imports Act® was enacted, because it was considered” thatthe measures of control imposed under rule & of the Defence of India Rules and subse- quently extended under the Emergency Provisions (Con- tinuance) Ordinance, 1946 (20 of 1946) would have tobe continued for some time longer, in order to avoid any dis- ‘turbance to the economy of the country during the transi- tion from war time to peace time conditions. At the same "The Railway Stores (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1955 (51 of 1955). soapiT™ Relay Stores Uninfl Ponessin) Orda, 1044 Go ‘sce the Statement of Objects and Reasons, Gazette of India, (1054), Part Hy section page 374. ‘Section 3. ‘The Telegraph Wires (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1950 (74 of | 1950). “Gazewe of India (1950), Part M, section 2, page 402 ‘See section 4A; Telegraph Wires (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1950 (74 of 1959), ae ‘The Imports and Exports (Contra) Act, 1947 (18 of 1947. ‘See the Statement of Objects and Reasons, Gaz wae Sa Gazette of Indi, (1947a1 time, penalties had been “considerably reduced to suit peace conditions” n, it may be noted, that some of atteraons the fhe Indian Penal Code dealing with offences i relating to trade marks, were repealed ot amended by Special legislation which dealt comprehensively with the subject. ‘Thus, section 478, Indian Penal Code” (Definition of trade-mark) and section 480, Indian Penal Code (Using @ false trade-mark), were repealed by. and sections 482, $83, 485 and 486 were amended by, the Trade and Merchan- dise Marks Act, 1958 ‘The study of the genesis of many of the special enact- special en- ments, thus, shows, that they were either enacted to deal aztments and with problems which arose temporarily but survived problem: longer than expected, or with problems that were confined 2%" to particular trades or industries or particular kinds of publie proverties, or otherwise to deal with. particalar Tpecies of acts veganded as harmful. These laws are, thus, properly described as “special”. Even though some of the kets proposed to be penalised by them’ were already punishable under the Indian Penal Code, yet a special law had to be passed CATEGORY 1--OPFENCES PREVENTING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT £2. We now proceed to consider, in detail, the various omnes pre- categories of offences mentioned in the Report of the San- yemingcco- thanam Committee‘, The first of these is the following: — nomic “Offences calculated to prevent or obstruct the (Cates 1 economic development of the country and endanger its economic health”. This appears to be a very wide and all-embracing category. The test being the economic development of the country and its economic health, enactments relating to public finance, control in trade, ‘control on industry, control of power and resources and the like, would all fall under that category. It, fact, it is wide enough to cover many of the offences mentioned in the other categories listed by the Committec, for example, evasion of taxes, and profiteering. But, as the other categories have been separately mentioned, the present one would have to be confined to what is not covered by them, We hav that seem he Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 (43 of 1958). ars. $5~99, supra Bag, thet. ‘Pane, 25 supra. ‘Soe Appendix 1 listed separately some of the existing laws ‘o have some bearing on such offences', thatOther econo ‘mentioned by ‘Santhanam Commitee, 48 list being illustrative only and not intended to be exhaus- tive. So far as transferring the penal provisions of these laws to the Indian Penal Code is concerned, we think that it would not be a feasible proposition. It would, in| the first place, tremendously increase the bulk of the Code. Secondly, ‘the penal provisions in these enactments are in- extricably woven with the other provisions or with the statutory rules issued thereunder. By way of example, we may cite the Industries (Development and Regulation) ‘Act!, The penal section in that Act is section 24, which punishes a contravention etc, (i) of the provisions of Several sections mentioned therein, or (ii) of directions or orders issued under the sections mentioned therein, or (iii) of any rule the contravention whereof is made punishable, The Act also contains provisions regarding burden of proof (section 28), and procedure and jurisdic tion (sections 27, 29, etc.) All these provisions would become incomplete if the penal sections are transferred to the Indian Penal Code, The same can be said of many other Acts, like the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 and the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947, 93, We next come to the question whether addition of any new provisions is called for under this category. At another place in the Report’, the Santhanam Commitee gave an Indication of the white-collar and economic crimes ‘which it had in mind, After observing that such crimes rendered the enforcement of the laws more difficult, and that this type of crime was more dangerous not’ only because the financial stakes were higher but also because irreparable damage to public morals was done, the Com- mittee stated, that tax. evasion and avoidance, share- Pushing, mal-practices in the share market and administra- Yion of companies, monopolistic controls, usury, under- invoicing or over-invoicing’, hoarding, profiteering, sub- standard performance of contracts of' construction and Supply, evasion of economic laws, bribery and corruption, election offences and mal-practices, were some examples of white-collar crimes. Now, of the examples so given by the Committee, most, if not all, would be covered by the existing enactments on the subjects in. question’, which include, certain provi- sions relating to. eronomic cffences also’. Monopolistic controls and sub-standard performance of contracts are, of course, important items. But the former has already been she “Tdustries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 (6s of ros) Reports of the Santhanam Committe, page 11, para. 273. ths to under-invoicng, ete, see also Report of the Santhanam Com- since, page’ 255, item (3m). ‘See Appendices 110 8. ‘See Appendix 1.49 the subject-matter of consideration by a separate Commis- sion’, whose report has been submitted recently, and it is unnecessary to discuss it in detail. The latter will be dealt, with separately*, 94. Beonomic crimes have received elaborate treatment in countries in Eastern Europe™'. But certain observations in relation to the laws in force in those countries penalis- ing such crimes may not be out of place, First, they seem to incarnate the economic and social philosophy of the group of countries concerned. Secondly. they include some activities which are, as a rule, not punishable else. where?, eg. specaiations’.” ‘Thirdly, ‘many of the formula: ions of the offences are of a sweeping character. The lan- guage employed is general’, so that" the provisions may lead to varying interpretations at different times and places. 95. For the reasons given below, we do not think that provisions of the general and sweeping character found in the laws of countries of Hastern Europe! can be incorporat- ed into the Indian Penal Code:— (a) The concepts of economic policy and ideology on which they are based have first to be accepted, before they can be incorporated into the criminal law, (b) Even if those concepts and ideology are’ ac- cepted, putting such provisions in the criminal law might lead to “bad judicial legislation", in view of their generality. In a country like "India, with numerous High Courts, such provisions are likely 10 lead to conflicting interpretations and consequent un. certainty in the law,—a risk which should be under. taken only where compelling reasons exist. (c) Even if such provisions are to be enacted as a part of the Criminal law, they would appear to be of @ special or temporary character. It is doubtful if they can be praperly put into the Indian Penal Code, which is the basic penal law of the country. 96. One of the comments received by us suggest, that under the first category’, the following offences should be *The Monopolies Commission, . ‘See paragraph 126, infra See para. 29—34, supra ‘See also Appendices 16 and 21. SOF, Mannheim, Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction (1946), page 18, ‘Para. 29, supra. ‘See Appendix 16, sections 225 and 227 (Hungarian Criminal Code), "Para. 94, supra. Par. 92, supra. Whether Moption of crimes from. Eisen feasibe. Poines sug ses in comments.Evasion, etc. oft. Category 2). 50 made penal by inserting 2 Chapter in the Indian Penal Code: — (i) smuggling across the Indian borders i) trafficking in foreign currency and bullion; (iii) any move, open or subtle, purported to obstruct any foreign aid; (iv) any move to in abstain from cultivation (v) inciting strikes calculated to paralyse any transport or communication system, such as Railways, Port oc road transport, ete.; (vi) under-invoicing export and _over-invoicing import: (vii) export of manufactured goods, handicrafts ot raw materials, in quantities below the specified stan- dards the peasants in any area to 97. We are not able to accept the suggestion. Some of the offences, eg, smuggling, and trafficking in foreign cur tency. are already covered by special enactments’. A few. Tike “any move to obstruct any foreign aid” or “any move t0 incite the peasant to abstain from cultivation” appear to be too wide. Assuming that such provisions would be constitutional—a point on which we do not express any Spinion—they might cover many innocent activities, For example, a person Who expresses an honest difference of opinion in regard to the policy followed as to foreign aid thay find himnself within the four corners of the suggested Offence of “any move to obstruct any foreign aid”. ‘The rest, Sich ae inciting strikes, ete, can. be more appropriately dealt with in legislation relating to industrial disputes, Catucory 2—Evaston ano Avornance oF Tax 98. The second category of offences mentioned by the Santhanam Committee is~ “Evasion and avoidance of taxes lawfully imposes At another place in the Report’, the Committee dis- cussed in detail the topte of evasion and avoidance ot fncome-tax, and enumerated certain sections “of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which appeared to the Committee to offer scope for avoidance and evasion’. The Committee observed, that the Department itself should examine and take suitable steps. to plug loopholes on these matters; it suggested certain administrative measures, as well as two ‘See Appendix r. ” = Report of the Santhanam Committee, page 271 and page 272, items (i) and (ei). " y ‘Those sections are listed in Appendix 10 10 this Report,a changes ofa legal nature, namely, (i) making the in- come-tax offences of illegal evasion and avoidance cogniz~ Sble_and non-compoundable, and (i) a provision that "the punishment should be imprisonment for at least three years, and the amount found to be evaded or avoided, Should be liable to forfeiture. It .nay also be noted, that so far as evasion of customs duty is concerned, the Report of the Committee contains a detailed discussion as to smuggting’ 99. It is unnecessary to elaborate here the distinction ordinarily understood between “evasion” and “avoidance”. ‘The former denotes a defect in the enforcement of the laws, while the latter denotes a defect in the law itself. ‘The latter has to be tackled by a detailed study of the provisions of the relevant enactments. 100. The following extract from the Report of the Income-tax Investigation Commission’, which was yre- sided over by Sir S. Varadachariar, former Judge of the Federal Court, luciély explains the distinction between the two:— ‘It remains to add a few observations relevant to the problem of avoidance and evasion. According to well-established usage, the term “avoidance” denotes the sitilisation of loopholes to effect tax saving, within the letter though perhaps contrary to the spirit of the law. Its rendered possible by defects in the framing of the law or in its drafting, as a result of which cases ‘within the interdmen; of the law have not been brougnt in by clear or apt words, or cases which ought to. be fairly comprised within ‘the policy of the law have ‘been omitted by oversight or for other reasons. Leak- age of tax in this way has to be prevented by making the law cleaver or wider; but there will never be an end to attempts at income-tax avoidance. Though a Lord Chancellor some years ago referred in terms of disapprobation to the efforts of tax dodgers and to “the professional gentlemen who assisted them in the matter” (Latilla v. Inland Revenue Commisstoner'— Law Reports 1943 Appeal Cases at page 381), popular or professional opinion does not seem to share that view bat is prepared to regard such attempts as a “commendable exercise of ingenuity”. As courts are slow to construe tax laws according to their “intent” (as distinguished from the letter of the law), occasional "Report of the Santhanam Committe, page 19, para, 3°15 and page ab *Report of the Income-tax Investigation Caramission, (1 . an 8 iat ion, (1949), page 7 *Lprila v. Inland Revonte Copomissonrs, (1943) ¥ All Ep a ax panl'356 Gist of Lord. (o48) + AN Fee. Reon ass «Evasion and Svoidance”™Attitude t0- wards. tae svoidance' in England 52 modifications cf the statute will be necessary to close loopholes. that “judicial construction cannot plug”, “Evasion” is applied to the escape from taxati accomplished by breaking the letter of the law, whether intentionally or through mistake or negli gence. Most frequently, taxes are evaded because proper administrative machinery has not been pro- vided or the machinery is not working properly. Evasion has therefore to be combated mainly by | “improving” the administration of the law—we advisedly say “improving” though some would prefer to speak of it as “tightening” the administration. “To the extent to which the weaknesses of the adminis- tration may be traceable to defects in the law (particu. lariy in the sanetions provided by the law), some changes in the law may be necessary even to prevent. evasion Under a system where the assessment of the tax depends to a large extent upon information given by the assessee, he has every opportunity, and, when the rate of tax. is high, every temptation, to attempt evasion. This can be met only by improving the efficioney of the administration”. 101. Two varying attitudes seem to have been shown, towards tax avoidance in England. The traditional at- titude of the judiciary was, that a tax-payer is entitled to avoid the payment of tax so long as he could do so. by legal means. ‘There is no rule of law against the subject's making genuine and lawful arrangements to reduce tax" 102. This t-ailitional attitude is represented by the following view expressed by Lord Quickswood?-*: — “Taxation is prima facie a wrong, for it consists in taking from the taxpayer what belongs to him; and that is prima facie wrong. Taxation is justified only by the authority of the State, which is expressed in the law. The taxpayer is morally bound to obey. the law, but is not bound beyond the law; for, apart from the law, taxation would be blackmail or racketeering, ‘There is not, behind taxing laws, as there is _ behind laws against’ crime, an independent moral obligation, When therefore the taxpayer has obeyed the law, he hhas done «ll that morality requires. Cf, LRG. v. Duke of Westminster, (3936) A.C, 19 3 (1935) All Eng. Reporis ‘Reprint 259, 267 (HLL. * For a detailed discussion on “evasion, shifting” and_ “minimising” of tax, see Encylopaeilia of Social Selences (September 1981 Reprint), Vil. 4p Page 35 under" Paxation”™ Robert’ Murray Haig), "Lord Quickwood, Letter to the Times, February 20, 1943, cited in Mannheim, Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction (r946), pebe 146. See also Lord Tomlin in LR.C. ¥. Westminster, (1936) A.Caty at page 195 (1935) AIL E.R. Repu, 259, 267.53 It is said, that by avoiding a tax he throws a load on to some other taxpayer. But this is not quite accurate; for the deficiency might be met by reducing expenditure jg it not a good thing that there should be this last lawful remedy. against oppressive taxation by a majority, that human ingenuity can always find a way by which the minority can escape from tyrannical imposts?”. 103, Lord Tomlin’s observations may also be cited!:— ‘Apart, howeve:, from the question of contract with which T have dealt, it is said that in revenue cases there is a doctrine that the court may ignore the legal position and regard what is called “the substance of the matter", and that here the substance of the matter ig that the annuitant was serving the Duke for some- thing equal to his former salary or wages and that, therefore, while he is so serving the annuity must be treated as salary or wages. ‘This supposed doctrine (upon which the commissioners apparently acted) seems to rest for its support upon a misunderstanding of language used in some earlier cases. ‘The sooner this misunderstanding is dispelled and the supposed doctrine given its quietus the better it will be for all concerned, for the doctrine seems to involve substi. tuting “the uncertain and crooked cord of discertion” for "The golden straight “mete wand of the law." (4 inst. 41). ‘Every man is entitled, if he can, to order his affairs so that the tax attaching under the appropriate Acts is less that it otherwise would be. If he succeeds in ordering them so as to secure this result, then, however unappreci« ative the Commissioners of Inland Revenue or his fellow taxpayers may be of his ingenuity, he cannot be compelled to pay an increased tar. This so-called doctrine of “the substance” seems to me to be nothing more than an attempt to make a man pay notwithstanding that he has so ordered his affairs that the amount of tax sought from him is not legally claimable.. 104. The following cbservations of Viscount Simon’, LC, however, illustrate @ change of attitude’: — ‘My Lords, of recent years much ingenuity has pended in certain quarters in attempting to G. «Dike of IWetminer, (1996) AG. n 195 (1935) Al Reports a, 267,268 Hy 799 ene “Lalla, Inland Revenue Canmisioners 1 : (194 Al Eng. Reports, 383, S86 735 Fee C8 oh a Mh °Detaled study ato tax aveidanes wil be found in— (@ notes by A. Farnwworth In the Modern Law Review, (1942 abe 75, (ipa) ane 243, and ioye) page Sas and article by Wheatrofy, “The atte of the Legislature and the Courts te tax avoidance,” (1955) 18) Moder Law Revi5 devise methods of disposition of income by which those who Were prepared to adopt them might enjoy the benefits of residence in this country while receiv~ ing the equivalent of such income, without sharing in the appropriate burden of British taxation. Judicial dicta’ may be cited which point out that, however ciaborate an] artificial such methods may'be, those who adopt them are “entitled” to do so. There is, of course, no doubt that they are within their legal rights, but that is no reason why their efforts, or those of the professional gentlemen who assist them in the matter, should be regarded as a commendable exercise of ngenuity or as a discharge of the duties of good citizenship. On the contrary, one result of such methods, if they succeed, is, of course, to increase pro tanto the load of tax on the shoulders of the great body of good citizens who do not desire, or do not know how, to adopt these manoeuvres. Another consequence is that the legislature has made amendments to our income tax code which alm at nullifying the effective ness of such schemes.” 105. But it would appear, that there has, again, been 2 trend in the reverse direction’. 106, The following observations of Lord Simonds would be of interest in this connection’: — “The determination of these appeals involves a consideration of certain sections of two Acts of Par- fiament which wete designed to bring within the ambit of taxation to income-tax and sur-tax income which would otherwise escape that burden. For that reason and because the ways of those who would avoid Vability to tax are often devious and obscure, the sec- tions are framed in language of the widest and most general scope and in the case of one of the Acts [1 Tefer to the Finance Act, 1936, section 18(4)] the opera- tive subsections are reinforced by a provision which appears to exhovt the assessing authority, and pre- sumably the court, to let the balance, wherever possible, be weighted against the taxpayer. But, this notwithstanding, I think that it remains the ' tax- payer's privilege to claim exemption from tax unless his case is fairly brought within the words of the tax- ing section, and it is in this light that I examine the ~“sVestey's (Lord) Exscutors_v. I. R. ©. (1949), All Eng. Rep. 1 an, 1115, 1124, (Per Lord Simonds and Lord Normand). *Pouts Beecutort v. ERC, (1951) 1 A.C. 443 + (951) 1 All Eng. Reports 76, 81, 82, $8 (HL) “ ALR. v, Wolfion, (1949) 1 AER. 865, 868. ‘Attorney General ¥. A. W. Gamogo Lid., (3949) 2 AER. 732° 734 SVestey'sLerd) Bxecutors v. LR nas 1193 GELS. (1949) 1 All Bng. Reports 1108,55 icability of the Finance Act, 1936, section 18, and the Finance Act, 1938, s. 38, to the circumstances of the late Lord Vestey and’ his brother Sir Edmund Vestey.”, Reference may be made to the observations of Lord Normand!:— “Parliament in its attempts to keep pace with the ingenvity devoted to tax avoidance may fall short of is, purpose. That is a misfortune for the taxpayers who do not try to avoid their share of the burden, anid i, is disappointing to the Inland Revenues. But’ the Court will not stretch the terms of taxing Acts in order to improve on the efforts of Parliament and_t0 stop yaps which are left open by the statutes. Tax avoidance is an evil, but it would be the beginning of ‘uch greater evils ‘if the courts were to overstretch the language of the statute in order to subject to tax- ation people of whom they disapproved.” 507. We may also refer to the principles adopted re garding interpretation of taxing Acts, The {ollowing observations of Lord Cairns’. may be referred to in this connection:-— “......as L understand the principle of all fiscal a, it is this: If the person sought to be taxed comes with in the letter of the law he must be taxed, how. ever great the hardship may appear to the judi cial_mind to be. On the other hand, if the Crown, seeking to recover the tax, cannot bring the ‘ject within the letter of the law, the sub- ect is free, however apparently within the spirit of the law ‘the case might otherwise appear to be. In other words, if there be admissible, in any statute, what is called an equitable construction, certainly such a construction is not admissible in a taxing statute, where you can simply adhere to the words of the statute.”, 108. Other decisions on the subject are collected in a recent case of the Andhra Pradesh High Court‘. The following observations of the Supreme Court may also be referred to: Very (Lard) Execitars v. ERC. (1949), «All Bog. Reports 1108, 1120 (H.L.). ea * * *Portngtn'. Attorney General, (969) Law Reports H.L. 100, 122. ‘Sec, further, Cres, Searate Law (1953), pages 115116. ‘Ramakrishna v. State of Andra Pradak, ALLR. 1965 A. P. 4x 42 3(November). 2 ad b 47 Law—5. Inverpreta: tion of ingAvoidance fnotalways Fraudulent. Views of Courts in India a to avoidance, 56 “Subsection (2) of section 21 (of the Bombay Salestax Act 3 of 1953) is a penal provision con- tained in a taxing statute and the Court cannot specu late contrary to the plain intendment of the words used about the object of the Legislature. If the Lexis- lature has failed to clarify its meaning by the use of appropriate language, the benefit thereof must go to the taxpayer. It is settled law that in case of doubt. that interpretation of a taxing statute which is bene- ficial to the taxpayer must be adopted.”." 109. Legislation passed in England during and after ihe Second World War illustrates the increasing efforts. made by the legislature to check avoidance of tax’. 110. As regards tax avoidance, it has been recognised in the U.S.A. that every transaction which results in tax avoidance is not always entered into with the sole object, of avoidance of tax. As an example, we may cite the American institution of “foundation”. An individual, a family or a corporation may donate a proportion of bis or its assets to a permanent institution “established for officially recognised charitable purposes”, the — donor usually’ being the controller of an industrial or business empire’, Such donations are exempt from gift tax, and are deductable for purposes of estate tax. So far as the donee organisations are concerned, they would ordinarily be exempt from income-tax, property tax and other taxes. Further. the donor gets a deduction in taxes in respect of the charitable gift inter vivos (within certain limits). By transferring the capital and annual income from his per- sonal estate, the donor thus reduces his liability to tax. At the same time, the donor sanctifies his name and gives a public proof of his social responsibility through the establishment of a charitable institution‘. 111. In many Indian _decisions‘."#."- it has been pointed out, that legal avoidance cannot be regarded as Teprehonsibie. State of Bomboy v_ datomobile ond. Atrcuural. Induce Corps (4961) 12° S7F.6."1a3 SC} Rapa, Hidajatllah and Shah Tf). *See, for example, section 35 (1), Excess Profits Tax Act, 1941 (UK). ag,'S Fiedmann, Tae in # Changing Soc, (1959) Pegs 86, 299 (0 ‘See tlgo Report of the Select Committee to investigate foundations ows Represetaes, Reports No. ast and Corey ad Seon 1989 ne Boi Sakinaboo, ALR. 1932 Bor. 116, 117 (Beeumont CJ. and Regt “tn re Conral Talis Cray ALR. 1941 Bom, 205, 206, 207 (Beaumont 3. and Kents J). a cn ‘Devarajuls Co. v. LCs ALR. 1950 Mad. 738, 72, part. 10. SMeyappa v. LTC, ALR. 1951 Mad, 506; $13, 524) para. 17. Ganga Sagar v. Emp ATR, 1629 All 919,923, (Mukeree J. Rajat. Clty LR. 9 Pat. 1943 ALR. 1930 Pat 33,38 (Couetasr- ‘Terell C35. o 3 35 See alo article in A.LR. 1955 Journ 26.A 57 The following passage in the judgment in a Bombay ease’ puts the matter lucidly:— “It has also been stated that the same result may be achieved by two entirely different transactions, and it may be that whereas one transaction could be subjected t» tax, the other might not be, and it is _not open to the Court to tell the assessee that he could rather have entered into a transaction which subjected him to taxation rather than a transaction which per= mitted him to escape taxation. A citizen is perfectly entitled to exercise his ingenuity so as to arrange his affairs as may make it possible for him legally and lawfully’ not to pay tax, and if his ingenuity succeeds, however reluctant the Court may be to acknowledge the cleverness of the assessee, the Court must give effect to the letter of the taxation law rather than strain that letter against the assessee.” 112. It may also be noted, that besides the imposition of penalities and institution of prosecutions, there are many other methods of preventing illegal evasion of taxes, par ticularly, strengthening the administrative machinery and streamlining the procedure. We need not repeat what has_ been said in the valuable reports of the various Com- mittees® that had occasion to go into the subject? 118, The existing provisions relating to tax evasion have been listed separately'.. Broadly speaking, provisions against evasion can be classified into— (i) provisiors which enable the taxing authority to assess income, ete, which has escaped assessment; (ii) provisions which empower such authority itself to impose a penalty; and (iii) provisions which create offences for which a prosecution can be instituted in the criminal courts, An example of the first® is section 34 of the Income-Tax Act. 1922, (now sections 147 to 153 of the Income-tax Act, 196i)*. An example of the second is section 273 of the Income-tax Act, 1961'. Strictly speaking, we are concerned here only with the third class. But it will be necessary to refer to provisions of the second class, for purposes of comparison, * Praidet memat Gov 17. Comins ALR. 1954 Bo. 95, De para. 3 (Chagla C.J.). ost 5 “Appendices 1210 x5 wo this Report_may be sem inthis connection "See par. 100, spr ‘See Appendix 2 *For htory of weston 34, ce Radhshyam v. Union of India ALR. 1960. Bom. 353, 88 ef ‘The Tncome-tax Act, 196t (43 of 1961). "Tag Income-tax Act, 196t (43 of 196%). Method of checking ‘cession. Existing provisions Snalysed.‘Trensfer of, existing pro- Eensble. Placing pro- the Penal Code. 38 114. We have considered the question whether the transfer of the provisions’ relating to evasion of tax to the Indian Penal Code would be advantageous. ‘The laws, of which there provisions form part, constitute self- contained Code, In the first place, these provisions con- tain. minute and detailed references to the other sections of the enactment of which they form part—e.g. the section under which a return is to be filed, or a stamp is to be fixed, or the like. ‘They cannot, be divorced from those sections. Secondly, it they are to be transferred to the Penal Code, then, whenever laws imposing new kinds of taxes are passed in the future, it may become necessary to amend Indian Penal Code also, and that might prove to be an in- convenient process, Thirdly, there are special procedural provisions’, which require ‘the sanction of a particular authority for instituting a prosecttion for an offence under the particular enactment, or which authorise the com: pounding of offences, and $0 on. If the penal provisions of the. taxing enactments are transferred to the Indian Penal Code, then the relevant procedural provisions of the tax- ing ‘enactments—vhich will then lose their justification for being retained in the taxing enactments will have tc bbe transfered to the Code of Criminal Procedure, and that process also would be inconvenient. 115. So far as we could ascertain, there is hardly any country governed by the common law system where the offence of evasion of taxes has been incorporated in the Penal Code. The provisions are found to exist either in the enactments relating to the particular taxes’, or in @ general Taxation Law', 116. Further, the administration of these laws requires specialised knowledge and experience, including, par- Hcularly, a knowledge of the various classes of income or transactions that are taxable, the various deductions, ex- emptions and concessions that are permissible, and the departmental practice. Even if these provisions are transferred to the Penal Code—assuming that such transfer is feasible—the need for this special knowledge and experience will always remain. There will be no practical improvement as the police will not possess this special knowledge and experience. 117. So far ag we could gather, none of the various ‘Committees or Commissions* that have gone into the ques- tion of taxation structure or Taxation Laws or the adminis- tration of Taxation Laws, has found fault with the placing of the penal provisions in the taxation enactments. * Para, 1735 nupra * Bog, section 279, Income-tax Act, 196t (42 of 1961), * For example, section 198 of the Tasmania (Australi) Criminal Code ‘Act, (1924) reproduced in Appendix 28. 4 For example, section 201, Internal Revenue Code of the U.S.A. dite ‘cussed in Appendix 23. * See Appendices 12, 13, 14 and 15.59 118. We also considered at length the question whether Question of i n Zon in the enactment of it gould be desirable to insert a general provision in, the sme! of Indian Penal Code, punishing the evasion of taxes. geen Pe arguments for and against the adoption of such a course tar "evtsion aze summarised below:— consicered. Arguments for and against including in the Indian Penal Code of the offence of tax-evasion For Against vision in the Indian Penal Code (1) The abhorrence is already y indicated by the Income-tox of the crime in question and the Act. It is not necessary to importance which it attaches to it. put it in the Indian Penal Code. (2) A comprehensive provision applicable (2) ‘The purpose is adequately to all caxss would be desirable. served by existing provision in the law relating to each tas. {3) Evasion of taxes is a major problem, (3) The defect is not in the law and should be dealt with criminally: “but in its enforcement. Even the existing penal provisions are not enforced, (4) Acts like keeping false accounts, mak- (4) In practice, filing a false ing false entries, keeping unaccounted "return is the usual type of money, should be covered. ‘sion. This is sufficiently Drovided for by existing laws. (5) Prosecition for tax-evasion should be (5) Tax evasion ig a technical allowed at the instance of any person,” subject, requiring special knowledge. Only the De- partmental Officers are in a position to understand the technicalities. (©) A sweeping provision may, in practice, ‘turn out to be vague, and thus cause hardship. eee60 (7) In particular, the word “evade” is vague, and may be interpreted so as to em- brace even legitimate avoid- (8) Any widening of the penal provisions regarding taxation faws should be _ undertaken with caution, as it may bring into being a weapon which has great potentialities for abuse. (5) Prosecution is not the only method of checking evasion. The real remedy lies in various other non-penal measures, such as a proper tax structure, adequate strength of officers, increased civic conscious ness, creation of cordial relations with assesses, and Prompt action. under the existing laws. (10) None of the various _Com- ‘mittees that have gone into the subject of taxation in India have recommended such a change. After a careful consideration of all the issues involved, we have come to the conclusion that the inclusion of a general penal provi- sion of the nature referred to above would not prove to be an improvement in practice, and may even cause hardship by reason of its vagueness. In considering the question of inserting such a penal provision, regard must be had aot only to those who are guilty, but also to those who are innocent.a 118. As to the question of insertion of new provisions Additioa of relating to evasion of tax, we do not think it proper to dis- new pro- cuss that question in the’ abstract. Any specific recom- mendation must await specific proposals for amendment. 120. In one of the comments received by us, a SUggeS~ Points sug- tion has been made that the suppression of income, or gested ia suppression of information relating to sale and purchase, Saments, should be made an offence, either by including it in a Chapter in the Penal Code intended to deal with social and economic offences, or by inserting a new section 477B. ‘The matter, however, seems to be amply covered by the provisions in the various enactments relating to taxation’, and a new provision does not appear to be called for. 121, Regarding “avoidance”, it is obvious that the Avoldance changes, if any, will have to be made not in the penal law how to be but in the taxing enactments! That is outside the scope “*#* of this Report. Catecory 3.—Mrsvsr or Pustic Postion ey Puntic SERVANTS 122, The third category of offences mentioned by the Misuse of Santhanam Committee ig the following:— ‘bak pon “Misuse of their position by public servants in public ser. making of contracts and disposal of public property, 32,0 5. issue of licences and permits and similar other matters” ‘The Committee observed’, that where there was power and discretion, there was always the possibility of abuse, more so when the power and discretion had been exercised in the context of scarcity and controls and pressure to sperd public money. It also referred* to dishonest prac- tices like the system of “speed money" (money paid to speed up the process of movement of files, etc.) and to the corruption prevalent in contracts of construction, © pur- chases, sales, ete. 123. There are numerous provisions regarding misuse Existing of position by Dublic servants in various enactments', Mis- poysipe tuse of such position in the making of contracts or disposal of property is not separately dealt with in any of these enactments. If by such misuse the public servant con- cerned obtains any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage, the offence would be covered by section 5(1) (d) read with ee Appendix 2. Gf, Para. 99-100, supra. * Report of the Santhanam Committe, page 9, para 2:6. «Report of the Sanchanam Committe, page 9, part. 2°10, © Report of the Santhanam Committe, page 10, para att, * See Appendix 3. . :Mirase without deneht. Points raked in Dalivery, ete of good not fn ascend Shoe with font (Gaeesory «). e section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Aet™*, the relevant portion of which is quoted below':— '5(1). A public servant is said to commit the offence of criminal misconduct in the discharge of his duty if he, by cozrupt or illegal means or by otherwise abusing his position as public servant, obtains for him- self or for sny other person any valuable thing or pecuniary udvantage. 5(2). Any public servant who commits criminal misconduct in the discharge of his duty shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one year but which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine: Provided that the court may, for any special reasons recorded in writing, impose a sentence of im- prisonment of less than one year.”. 124, What remains is the misuse of such position with- out obtaining any such benefit. Such cases would be rare, and if they do happen, it would be difficult to ascribe a criminal intention to the person concerned in such cases. 125 It has been suggested in one of the comments re- ceived by us, that a new section—section 164A—should be inserted in the Indian Penal Code to penalise the misuse of position by public servants in the making of contracts, ete. The matter, however, seems to be sufficiently cover- ed by section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. GORY 4—DELIVERY OF GOODS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CONTRACT 128, The fourth category of the offences listed by the Santhanam Committee is the following:— “Delivery by individuals and industrial and com: mercial undertakings of goods not in accordance with agreed specifications in fulfilment of contracts entered into with public authorities”. At another place in the Report‘, the Committee observed, that frequently it was the dishonest contractors and suppliers who, having obtained the contract by under- cutting, wanted to deliver inferior goods or get approval for sub-standard work, and, for this purpose, were prepar- ed to spend a portion of their ill-earned profit. In an ‘Annexure to the Report’, the Committee discussed in de~ tail how favours could be shown by passing and accepting Can ¥ Phe Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 @ of 1947) + For a detailed analysis, sce Appendix 23. 8 The Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 (2 of 194 «Report of the Santhanam Commitee, page 10, para 2*11. “Report of the Santhanam Commitee, Annemure VII, page 236, item @63 goods which were wot strictly in accordance with the specifications laid down in the accepted tenders, or _by not applying the penalty clause in respect of rejected goods, ‘or by not strictly applying all the terms of the contract, of by giving wrong certificates about completion of inspection or actual despatch of goods. 127. We have iusted separately! some of the existing provisions which have a bearing on the mal-practice in question the most important of these are sections 415 and 420, Indian Penal Code, which run as follows:— “415, Wnvever, by deceiving any person, fraudu? ently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property, is said to “cheat”. Explanation.—A dishonest concealment of facts is a deception within the meaning of this section.’ “420. Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly in- duces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable ‘security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is'capable of being con- verted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may,extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to 128. We considered carefully the question whether the offence in question is covered by section 415—420, Indian Penal Code. “Cheating”, as defined in section 415, requires— (a) deception of a person, plus (b) fraudulently or dishonestly inducing the person. s0 deceived to deliver any property ete. OR (a) deception of a person, plus (®) intentionally inducing the person so deceived to do or omit any thing which he would not do or omit if he were not deceived, and which act or omission causes, etc., damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property. Existing Provisions Analysed. Cheating. Cheating and dishonesdly find delivery of property. Cheating” and delivery of goods te,64 ‘The section, thus, falls into two parts’. Under the first part, the act must be done fraudulently, etc, and must re- Eult in delivery, etc. Under the second part, Mere must be intentional inducement, etc. and the act or Omission in- duced must cause damage or harm. Deception, is, how- ever, common to both the parts. 129. Deception generally is “to lead into error by caus- ing to believe what is false or to disbelieve what is true”. The following observations of Buckley J.’ as to the meaning of “deceive” are interesting: — ‘To deceive is, ! apprehend, to induce a man to be- jeve that a thing is true which is false, and which the person practising the deceit knows or believes to be false. To defraud is to deprive by deceit: it is by deceit to induce a man to act to his injury. More tersely it may be put, that to deceive is by falsehood to induce a state of mind; to defraud is by deceit to induce a course of action, (The aspect of likeliood of injury, as an ingredient of “intent to defraud”, is not relevant for the present purpose) ‘Meaning of 130, The first ingredient of cheating is, thus, “deception” lexptoO”. The point which requires consideration is, whether there is “deception” when 3 person delivers sub-standard goods, without making any express representation that the goods are in accordance with the contract. The argument that may be advanced is, that the contractor does not deceive any person, where he makes no representation that the goods are in accordance with the contract. We are not inclined to accept this argument. Though decided cases dealing with this specific point are few, it would appear, that in such case a representation to the above effect could be implied. It may be pointed out, that, as provided by the Explanation to section 415, Indian “Penal Code*.', a dishonest conezalinent of facts is “deception”. Tlustrations (0) and (i) to section 415 also emphasise the same aspect. Gh, Ranji v, Horthadrad, ALR. 1960 Bom. 268 tee P.P.v. Vadantam, ALR. 1952 Mad. 183 para. 4 (Subba Rao QR 'Re London and Globe Finance Corporation Led. (1903) « Ch. 728, rss sep in Rs, Wins (95D 2 All Ene, Repors rst, 498 As 10 this s00o— RN, Gooderson, “Prejudice as a test of Intent to defraud (1960) Cam." Law Journal 199, 201. GQ. B. ¥. Abbas, LLR. 25 Cal. 512 (F. BD. GQ. E. v, Soshi Bhushan, (1898) LLR. 15 All, 210, 237 ‘See Appendix 24 ‘See also para. 127, supra "Surendra ¥. Bai Narmada, ATR. 1963 Gui. 239065 131, As has been observed’, “The practice of deception implies the practice of fraud and falsehood. For, there can bbe no deception without fraud, and falsehood is a species of fraud implied in deceit. Now, fraud is hydra-headed, and its ways of attack are insidious and innumerable. It ‘may consist of words, acts or conduet, or all combined.” 132. In practice, the point” may often be academic, as Point of in respect of huge contracts where detailed bills are to be implied re. Submitted, the bills will have to describe. the goods sup. BRaNa plied in great detail, so that the contractor cannot avoid making an express representation at some stage or other’. 133. Where the defect in the goods is discovered before Anempt to payment, it would be an attempt to cheat'.t, cheat. 134. Another point which we had to consider was, whe- Complicity ther eases Where the oificer receiving delivery and the Softee offender are acting in complicity, are covered by sections fat, 415—420, Indian Penal Code. We think that they would be covered. In fact, this seems to have been assumed in a recent decision of the Supreme Court’, and in cases of cer- tain High Courts*- 185. In England, at common law, short delivery was held Position in not to be “cheating” (in the absence of use of false mea- English law. sures, ete, as a general course of dealing, or to many cus- tomers, or unless chee is a conspiracy to cheat)"-" ‘The act was regarded only as an unfair dealing. It was stated, that fraud, to be the object of a criminal prosecution, must be calculated to defraud numbers, *Gour, Penal Law of India, (1962), Vol. 3, pege 2235, Para. 130, supra, Sf Billnalurst v. Emp. ALR, 1924 Cal 18, 415 43 (Sanderson C. aoa BEE Ein. Emp 1924 Cal. 18, 41, 43 (Sanderson C.J, 4 Billingursv. Emp. ALR. 1924 Cal. 18, 415 43 (Sanderson aa in Ep. 924 8 41, 43 (Sanderson C, J. ! Rw. Light, Gots) 84 LAK, 194-1 cds 9S) 84 LILKB. 865 5 (4904-15) All. LR. Rep. 659 “ Halsbury’s Laws of England, (3nd Bde), Vol. 10, page 828, footnote ‘nd page 931, para, 1602, a ae K "Cf. Baneoari Lal v. The Union of Indiay A.LR. 1963 S.C, 1620, "See in re J. S. Dhas, ALR. 1940 Mad. 158, 157. + he dein jg Shemrayn v. Sate of Bar, AL. 199 Pa a 298,229; pa tr. RBar Tc Be ditigushca oh 963 Pat 25, wR. ¥, Whealy, (760) 2 Burs. 1125, 112, ete in (iia leadings, etc, (1962° Sans) pare aor, © 27 cited In Archbold, % See also Russel on Crime (1964), Vol. 2, pages 1163 and 1164,66 ‘This rule of the common law was altered, to some ex tent, by section 32, Larceny Act’~. The relevant portion of the section runs’as fellows: — 32. Every person who by any false pretence () with intent to defraud, obtains from any other per- son any chattel, money, or valuable security, or catises or procures eny money to be paid, or any chattel or valuable security to be delivered, to himself or to any other person for the use or benefit or on account of himself or anv other person; .. Escceecsedac shalt be guilty of a misdemeanour and on conviction thereof lable fo imprisonment for any term not exceed ing five years” The expression “false pretence” includes a prew tence by act or conduct, without words spoken’. Kinis of 186, In one of Uke comments* received by us, it has been malpntins stated tbat there aie three kinds of malpractices that have rome to notice: {a) The ¢ in collusion with the inspectors of Covernmoat, committed iMlegal acts in getting stores of an inferior quality passed as if they were of the specifications specified in the contract, and supplied the same and induced the Government to part with the vahic thereof. (0) The contractor, after getting the stores passed by the inspectors, despatched unpassed stores in place of passed stores, ‘and thus defrauded the Government by inducing it to part with the value of the passed stores. (c) The contractor, by furnishing false particulars and quoting ficliticas numbers. of Railway Receipts, cheat>d the Government and obtained 90 per cent. price of the goods :vithout supplying them. See seotion 32, Larceny Act, 1936 6 and 7 Geo. 5, © so). Russell on Crime (1964), Vol. 2, pages 1165 and 1166, "Russell on Crime (2964), Vol 2, page 1276.

You might also like

• Final Criminal Procedure Code Course Manual - Spring 2024

  

  No ratings yet

  Final Criminal Procedure Code Course Manual - Spring 2024

  16 pages
• Gujarat High Court

  

  0% (1)

  Gujarat High Court

  13 pages
• R V Kelkar

  

  No ratings yet

  R V Kelkar

  4 pages
• West Bengal Law Academy A Bench Mark Law Coaching Institute in Bengal Case Analysis Air India V Nargesh Mirza

  

  100% (1)

  West Bengal Law Academy A Bench Mark Law Coaching Institute in Bengal Case Analysis Air India V Nargesh Mirza

  2 pages
• Law Commission of India Report No. 47 - The Trial and Punishment of Social and Economic Offences

  

  83% (6)

  Law Commission of India Report No. 47 - The Trial and Punishment of Social and Economic Offences

  159 pages
• 47th Law Commission Report PDF

  

  No ratings yet

  47th Law Commission Report PDF

  95 pages
• Forms of Privileged Class Deviance: Dhupdale V. Y

  

  No ratings yet

  Forms of Privileged Class Deviance: Dhupdale V. Y

  36 pages
• Law Commission Report No. 222 - Need For Justicedispensation Through ADR Etc.

  

  100% (1)

  Law Commission Report No. 222 - Need For Justicedispensation Through ADR Etc.

  41 pages
• SMT SUDESHNA LL.M III SEM History and Basic Principle of Criminal Law (Criminal Jurisprudence in Primitive and Encient Age) L-3009

  

  100% (1)

  SMT SUDESHNA LL.M III SEM History and Basic Principle of Criminal Law (Criminal Jurisprudence in Primitive and Encient Age) L-3009

  4 pages
• JOINDER AND MISJOINDER OF CHARGE UNDER CR - Edited

  

  No ratings yet

  JOINDER AND MISJOINDER OF CHARGE UNDER CR - Edited

  18 pages
• Responsibility of State To Control, Deter and Punish Crime

  

  No ratings yet

  Responsibility of State To Control, Deter and Punish Crime

  16 pages
• Emerging Issues in Criminal Psychology Are Shaped by Advancements in Technology

  

  No ratings yet

  Emerging Issues in Criminal Psychology Are Shaped by Advancements in Technology

  6 pages
• WCC Notes Murari Sir

  

  No ratings yet

  WCC Notes Murari Sir

  186 pages
• Female Criminality Supriya

  

  No ratings yet

  Female Criminality Supriya

  17 pages
• IPC Offence of Abetment RK

  

  No ratings yet

  IPC Offence of Abetment RK

  23 pages
• Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs. State of Punjab

  

  No ratings yet

  Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs. State of Punjab

  3 pages
• Law Commission Report No. 154 - The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act No 2 of 1974) Vol I

  

  No ratings yet

  Law Commission Report No. 154 - The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act No 2 of 1974) Vol I

  128 pages
• Suvedhya CRPC Project - Inquest Report

  

  No ratings yet

  Suvedhya CRPC Project - Inquest Report

  25 pages
• Loopholes of The Penal Code, 1860 & Recommended Suggestion

  

  No ratings yet

  Loopholes of The Penal Code, 1860 & Recommended Suggestion

  15 pages
• Comparative Analysis of Dying Decleration in India and England

  

  100% (1)

  Comparative Analysis of Dying Decleration in India and England

  5 pages
• Restitution Stops Where Repayment Begins

  

  No ratings yet

  Restitution Stops Where Repayment Begins

  28 pages
• White Collar Crimes: Noida International University

  

  No ratings yet

  White Collar Crimes: Noida International University

  14 pages
• Furqaan

  

  No ratings yet

  Furqaan

  15 pages
• Kishore Da 1 P

  

  No ratings yet

  Kishore Da 1 P

  28 pages
• The Punjab Rent Act, 1995 Bare Act

  

  No ratings yet

  The Punjab Rent Act, 1995 Bare Act

  45 pages
• The Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act PDF

  

  No ratings yet

  The Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act PDF

  14 pages
• WCC Project

  

  No ratings yet

  WCC Project

  4 pages
• Specific Relief Amendment Act 2018 An Analysis

  

  No ratings yet

  Specific Relief Amendment Act 2018 An Analysis

  5 pages
• Sentencing Process and Policies

  

  No ratings yet

  Sentencing Process and Policies

  17 pages
• Socio Economic Offences in India PDF

  

  No ratings yet

  Socio Economic Offences in India PDF

  8 pages
• External Aids To Interpretation

  

  No ratings yet

  External Aids To Interpretation

  13 pages
• Offences Relating To Miscarriage

  

  No ratings yet

  Offences Relating To Miscarriage

  6 pages
• Xi M. K. Nambyar Memorial National Level Moot Court Competition 2021

  

  No ratings yet

  Xi M. K. Nambyar Memorial National Level Moot Court Competition 2021

  36 pages
• White Collar Crimes

  

  No ratings yet

  White Collar Crimes

  23 pages
• Evidentiary Value of Banker's Book

  

  No ratings yet

  Evidentiary Value of Banker's Book

  8 pages
• Devki Alas Vs Stat of Haryana

  

  No ratings yet

  Devki Alas Vs Stat of Haryana

  4 pages
• Navjot Sandhu Case

  

  0% (1)

  Navjot Sandhu Case

  10 pages
• Fifth Execption To Murder

  

  No ratings yet

  Fifth Execption To Murder

  16 pages
• Law Commission Report No. 183 - A Continuum On The General Clauses Act, 1897 With Special Reference To The Admissibility and Codification of External Aids To Interpretation of Statutes, 2002

  

  0% (1)

  Law Commission Report No. 183 - A Continuum On The General Clauses Act, 1897 With Special Reference To The Admissibility and Codification of External Aids To Interpretation of Statutes, 2002

  41 pages
• Before The Hon'Ble Supreme Court of Indica

  

  No ratings yet

  Before The Hon'Ble Supreme Court of Indica

  15 pages
• Ipleaders

  

  No ratings yet

  Ipleaders

  11 pages
• IPC

  

  No ratings yet

  IPC

  30 pages
• Ios Notes U5

  

  No ratings yet

  Ios Notes U5

  14 pages
• Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Chapter 15

  

  No ratings yet

  Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Chapter 15

  26 pages
• Rules of The High Court of Kerala, 1971

  

  No ratings yet

  Rules of The High Court of Kerala, 1971

  120 pages
• 8TH Sem Moot Court

  

  No ratings yet

  8TH Sem Moot Court

  16 pages
• Salient Features of Limitation Act: Assistant Professor - In-Law

  

  No ratings yet

  Salient Features of Limitation Act: Assistant Professor - In-Law

  22 pages
• Restitution

  

  No ratings yet

  Restitution

  20 pages
• Project Topics - Criminlogy, Penology and Victimology LLB 5th Sem

  

  No ratings yet

  Project Topics - Criminlogy, Penology and Victimology LLB 5th Sem

  2 pages
• Arnesh Kumar State of Bihar

  

  100% (1)

  Arnesh Kumar State of Bihar

  26 pages
• Thiagarajan Chettiar and Anr. vs. E.M. Muthappa Chettiar: AIR 1961 SC 1225

  

  No ratings yet

  Thiagarajan Chettiar and Anr. vs. E.M. Muthappa Chettiar: AIR 1961 SC 1225

  12 pages
• AN ASSIGNMENT On Victim Compensation

  

  No ratings yet

  AN ASSIGNMENT On Victim Compensation

  24 pages
• UPDATED - Doctrine of Occupied Field

  

  No ratings yet

  UPDATED - Doctrine of Occupied Field

  9 pages
• History of CRPC: (I) (Ii) (Iii)

  

  No ratings yet

  History of CRPC: (I) (Ii) (Iii)

  4 pages
• Public Interest Lawyering

  

  No ratings yet

  Public Interest Lawyering

  2 pages
• ADPO Syllabus - 10

  

  No ratings yet

  ADPO Syllabus - 10

  2 pages
• IPC Case Empror Vs Barendra KumarGhose

  

  100% (3)

  IPC Case Empror Vs Barendra KumarGhose

  5 pages
• Crime, Whitecollar Crime, Economic Crime

  

  No ratings yet

  Crime, Whitecollar Crime, Economic Crime

  17 pages
• Economic Offences

  

  No ratings yet

  Economic Offences

  69 pages
• L - IPC - at A Glance - Dr.R.Madhavi

  

  No ratings yet

  L - IPC - at A Glance - Dr.R.Madhavi

  14 pages
• Pmla-Appl 1 2019 06 03 2020 Final Order

  

  100% (2)

  Pmla-Appl 1 2019 06 03 2020 Final Order

  38 pages
• Rahul Chaudhary

  

  No ratings yet

  Rahul Chaudhary

  3 pages
• Vsa04032020cw102892019 130645

  

  No ratings yet

  Vsa04032020cw102892019 130645

  9 pages
• Display PDF

  

  No ratings yet

  Display PDF

  28 pages
• 2013 3 1502 21150 Judgement 05-Mar-2020

  

  No ratings yet

  2013 3 1502 21150 Judgement 05-Mar-2020

  68 pages
• 1476 2020 9 1502 21186 Judgement 28-Feb-2020

  

  No ratings yet

  1476 2020 9 1502 21186 Judgement 28-Feb-2020

  27 pages
• Abail (A) 1094 2020

  

  No ratings yet

  Abail (A) 1094 2020

  36 pages
• Pinaki Panani Bogus Purchases

  

  No ratings yet

  Pinaki Panani Bogus Purchases

  6 pages
• Ordjud

  

  No ratings yet

  Ordjud

  13 pages
• Justice Gautam Patel

  

  No ratings yet

  Justice Gautam Patel

  8 pages
• Downloaded

  

  No ratings yet

  Downloaded

  14 pages
• Ordjud

  

  No ratings yet

  Ordjud

  7 pages
• Vishal Engineering

  

  No ratings yet

  Vishal Engineering

  3 pages
• Kun Motor Company

  

  No ratings yet

  Kun Motor Company

  12 pages
• 1

  

  No ratings yet

  1

  4 pages
• Fao-M 10 2020 27 01 2020 Final Order

  

  No ratings yet

  Fao-M 10 2020 27 01 2020 Final Order

  4 pages
• Ordjud

  

  No ratings yet

  Ordjud

  22 pages
• Ordjud

  

  No ratings yet

  Ordjud

  18 pages
• Punjab Govt. Action Plan For Protection of Property of Parents SR Ctzns

  

  No ratings yet

  Punjab Govt. Action Plan For Protection of Property of Parents SR Ctzns

  4 pages
• Consumer Protection Act, 2019

  

  No ratings yet

  Consumer Protection Act, 2019

  40 pages
• Downloaded

  

  100% (1)

  Downloaded

  12 pages
• Fao 904 2016 20 12 2019 Final Order

  

  No ratings yet

  Fao 904 2016 20 12 2019 Final Order

  11 pages
• Display PDF

  

  No ratings yet

  Display PDF

  10 pages
• PDF Upload 369036

  

  100% (1)

  PDF Upload 369036

  6 pages