SEF are those which are degrading society socially &economically**greed for money is the main

reason behind this**this is often confused with other offences but has thin line difference b/w them
**many majors have been taken by the govt. time to time to curb this problem but still, a lot is
needed to improve the condition**this describe 2 types 1.Conventional offences [mens rea:murder,
theft, rape] 2.Nonconventional offences[no mens rea:white collar crime, socio eco off., organised
crime]. CAUSES industrial revolution**transition from rural & traditional society to industrialized
society**extreme business competitiveness**technological & scientific developments**decline in
ethical, moral& spiritual values**materialistic happiness& greed for money.

Unit 1 A. Laws relating to maintenance of essential supplies The Prevention of Black-marketing and
Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 was enacted on 12th February, 1980
and enforced on 5th October, 1979. The act aims to prevent un-ethical trade practices which include
black-marketing and hoarding of essential commodities, the act lays provisions for punishment
against such persons who commit either of these.** The act empowers state government or central
government or an officer not below the rank of Joint secretary representing centre or state
government in case has a reason to believe that a person is committing an against provisions of the
Act shall make an order for detaining such person. Act shall directly apply to such person
committing, aiding or abetting an offence under provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 or
any other law dealing with distribution, production or supply of essential commodities; any person
who make profits by defeating provisions of the act. The Act also gives similar power of taking action
to district magistrates and commissioner of police. An order made by an officer under sub section (2)
of section 3 shall be brought into the notice of government along with relevant details; the order
shall remain into force for not more than twelve days after making it within which State Government
shall approve the order. The State government shall within seven days report to Central Government
along with grounds of order where-after detention order under sub section (2) of section 3 shall be
carried. No order of detention shall be invalid merely on the ground that detention was carried
outside territorial jurisdiction of the government making order.** Section 4 of the Act relates to
absconding persons, once a person is found to avoid order of detention or is absconding, the
Government or officer shall draft a report in writing to Metropolitan Magistrate or Judicial
magistrate first Class who shall order against such person under section 82, 83, 84 and 85 of Code of
Criminal Procedure which shall apply against the person and his property. Provisions of section 4 are
also applicable once the authorities have an apprehension of absconding of person against whom
orders of detention have been made.** Incase a person is notified to present himself before court of
law he shall do so on the date and time specified incase of failure to make an appearance such
person shall be punished with imprisonment extending one year and with fine or both. Offences
under the act shall be cognizable. Person detained shall be made aware of the ground of detention
and shall be given an opportunity of fair representation.** Section 9 of the Act deals with
appointment of an advisory board consisting of three persons who is, are qualified or had been
Judge of a High Court, along with one another member who is, or has been Judge of High Court. The
state government is imposed with a duty to refer the deatined person before advisory board along
with the representation of grounds of detention, whereafter the advisory board shall look into all
aspects of the matter brought in front of it. The advisory board after giving an opportunity to person
detained shall draft a report which shall be acted upon by the Government. The report shall either
ask the government to revoke detention orders or shall further continue the detention. Maximum
period of detention shall be six months from the date of detention. The order of detention may be
revoked under provisions of section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 only after confirmation from
State or Central Government. Person detained may be temporarily released after imposing
necessary conditions on release of such person one such condition may be filing of bond along with
sureties. Incase a person breaches conditions of release his bond shall be forfeited. The Act protects
all acts and actions taken in good faith under the provisions of the Act.** Thus the Act is an effort to
bring into hold of law person who inorder to suffice there greed keep essential commodities out of
the reach for other people.

UNIT 2 A-Prevention of Food Adulteration The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare is responsible
for ensuring safe food to the consumers. Keeping this in view, a legislation called "Prevention of
Food Adulteration Act, 1954" was enacted. The objective envisaged in this legislation was to ensure
pure and wholesome food to the consumers and also to prevent fraud or deception. The Act has
been amended thrice in 1964, 1976 and in 1986 with the objective of plugging the loopholes and
making the punishments more stringent and empowering Consumers and Voluntary Organisations
to play a more effective role in its implementation. The subject of the Prevention of Food
Adulteration is in the concurrent list of the constitution. However, in general, the enforcement of
the Act is done by the State/U.T Governments. The Central Government primarily plays an advisory
role in its implementation besides carrying out various statutory functions/duties assigned to it
under the various provisions of the Act. The laws regulating the quality of food have been in force in
the country since 1899. Until 1954, several States formulated their own food laws. But there was a
considerable variance in the rules and specifications of the food, which interfered with inter-
provincial trade. The Central Advisory Board appointed by the Government of India in 1937 and the
Food Adulteration Committee appointed in 1943, reviewed the subject of Food Adulteration and
recommended for Central legislation. The Constitution of India provided the powers to Central
Government for making such legislation as the subjects of Food and Drugs Adulteration are included
in the concurrent list. The Government of India, therefore, enacted a Central Legislation called the
Prevention of Food adulteration Act (PFA) in the year 1954 which came into effect from 15 June,
1955. The Act repealed all laws, existing at that time in States concerning food adulteration. In India,
a three-tier system is in vogue for Ensuring food quality and food safety:  Government of India; 
State/UT Governments;  Local Bodies. Prevention of Food Adulteration Act:  Keeping close liaison
with State/local bodies for uniform implementation of food laws.  Monitoring of activities of the
States by collecting periodical reports on working of food laws, getting the reports of food poisoning
cases and visiting the States from time to time.  Arranging periodical training programme for Senior
Officer/Inspector/Analysts.  Creating consumer awareness about the programme by holding
exhibitions/seminars/training programmes and publishing pamphlet'.  Approving labels of Infant
Milk Substitute and Infant food, so as to safeguard the health of infants.  Coordinating with
international bodies like ISO/FAO/WHO and Codex.  Carrying out survey-cum-monitoring activities
on food contaminants like colours.  Giving administrative/financial/technical support to four
Central Food Laboratories situated in Kolkata, Ghaziabad, Mysore and Pune and providing technical
guidance to the food laboratories set up by the States/Local Bodies.  Holding activities connected
with National Monitoring Agency vested with powers to decide policy issues on food irradiation. 
Formulation of Manual on food analysis method. The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare is
designated as the National Codex Contact Point in India to examine and formulate India's views on
the agenda for the various meeting of Codex Alimentarius Commission, a joint venture of FAO/WHO
dealing with International Food Standards and its subsidiary committees. The Ministry of Health and
Family Welfare constituted a National Codex Committee (NCC) and an Assistant Director General
(PFA) has been working as Liaison Officer for NCC. The NCC has further constituted 24 Shadow
Committees corresponding to various Codex commodities committees for preparation and
finalization of India's stand. India has been regularly attending the various sessions of the Codex
Alimentarius Commission and various Codex Commodity Committees to put forward her views and
defend these views. B - Control of Spurious Drugs: Globally, every country is the victim of
substandard or spurious drugs, which result in life threatening issues, financial loss of consumer and
manufacturer and loss in trust on health system. The aim of this enumerative review was to probe
the extent on poor quality drugs with their consequences on public health and the preventive
measures taken by the Indian pharmaceutical regulatory system. Government and non-government
studies, literature and news were gathered from journals and authentic websites. All data from 2000
to 2013 were compiled and interpreted to reveal the real story of poor quality drugs in India. For
minimizing spurious/falsely-labelled/falsified/counterfeit drugs or not of standard quality drugs,
there is urgent requirement of more stringent regulation and legal action against the problem.
However, India has taken some preventive steps in the country to fight against the poor quality
drugs for protecting and promoting the public health.**With a population of more than 1.24 billion,
right to health is a fundamental right in India and has been recognized in the national constitution
and statutory laws as well as in international laws. Globally, about 2 billion people, one third of the
global population lack access to essential medicines. As medicine are life saving entities and thus are
more essential for the treatment, while they account for 20-60% of care cost and 50-90% of this cost
is being paid by the patient, particularly in low and middle income countries. India is a developing
country where more than 40% of the population survives on less than US $1 a day and if a patient
needs medicines he has to pay more than half of this. There are some schemes by Indian
Government for distribution of free generic medicines for certain categories of patients. However,
people accept, prefer and buy counterfeit or substandard products over genuine or branded
products due their cheap price, easy accessibility and availability in the market. Consumer does not
know about the manufacturer or the quality of the product and many time they are unaware of
expired, degraded or substandard products which ultimately results in failure of the treatment and
with antibiotics this lead to antimicrobial resistance. Substandard product arises correspondingly
due to lack of expertise, unfair manufacturing practices or insubstantial infrastructure; whereas
counterfeit is the product of black marketer. The problem of poor quality is already very serious and
steadily growing and is likely to cause much more damage in the near future. As such poor quality
drug does not bear any universal definition as it may vary from country to country. In general poor
quality drug are the spurious /falsely-labeled/falsified/counterfeit (SFFC) drugs that can cause
treatment failure or even death. Accordingly, International medical products anticounterfeiting
taskforce (IMPACT) of World Health Organization (WHO) defines SFFC medicines as “medicines
which are deliberately and fraudulently mislabelled with respect to identity and/or source, and also
which may include products with correct ingredients or with the wrong ingredients, without active
ingredients, with insufficient or too much active ingredient, or with fake packaging”. In India, as per
Drug and Cosmetic (D and C) act, 1940, under section 17, 17A and 17B poor quality drug comprises
of misbranded, spurious and adulterated drugs, respectively. With the 2008 amendment of D and C
act, Indian drug regulatory authority that is Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (CDSCO)
has categorised not of standard quality (NSQ) products in three categories A, B and C that is helpful
in categorising the products during quality evaluation. Category A incorporates spurious and
adulterated drug products; which conceal the real identity of the product or formulation and be
similar to some well-known brand. These products may or may not contain active ingredients and
generally manufactured by unlicensed antisocial people or sometimes by licensed manufacturers.
Products that consist of adulterant/substituted product or incorporate some filth material are
known as adulterated drugs. Category B include grossly substandard drugs in which product fails the
disintegration or dissolution test and where active ingredient assay get below 70% and 5% of
permitted limit for thermo labile and thermos table product, respectively for tablets or capsules. In
case of parenteral preparation, failing sterility, pyrogen/end toxin test or inappropriate toxicity, and
fungus presence in any liquid preparation hold such products in this substandard category.
UNIT 3: TOPIC: B- Anti Corruption Laws Corruption laws in India Public servants in India can be
penalized for corruption under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Prevention of Corruption Act,
1988. The Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 prohibits benami transactions. The
Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 penalises public servants for the offence of money
laundering. India is also a signatory (not ratified) to the UN Convention against Corruption since
2005. The Convention covers a wide range of acts of corruption and also proposes certain preventive
policies **i. The IPC defines “public servant” as a government employee, officers in the military, navy
or air force; police, judges, officers of Court of Justice, and any local authority established by a
central or state Act. ii. Section 169 pertains to a public servant unlawfully buying or bidding for
property. The public servant shall be punished with imprisonment of upto two years or with fine or
both. If the property is purchased, it shall be confiscated. iii. Section 409 pertains to criminal breach
of trust by a public servant. The public servant shall be punished with life imprisonment or with
imprisonment of upto 10 years and a fine. The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 iv. In addition to
the categories included in the IPC, the definition of “public servant” includes office bearers of
cooperative societies receiving financial aid from the government, employees of universities, Public
Service Commission and banks. v. If a public servant takes gratification other than his legal
remuneration in respect of an official act or to influence public servants is liable to minimum
punishment of six months and maximum punishment of five years and fine. The Act also penalizes a
public servant for taking gratification to influence the public by illegal means and for exercising his
personal influence with a public servant. vi. If a public servant accepts a valuable thing without
paying for it or paying inadequately from a person with whom he is involved in a business
transaction in his official capacity, he shall be penalized with minimum punishment of six months
and maximum punishment of five years and fine. It is necessary to obtain prior sanction from the
central or state government in order to prosecute a public servant. The Benami Transactions
(Prohibition) Act, 1988 The Act prohibits any benami transaction (purchase of property in false
name of another person who does not pay for the property) except when a person purchases
property in his wife’s or unmarried daughter’s name. i. Any person who enters into a benami
transaction shall be punishable with imprisonment of upto three years and/or a fine. ii. All
properties that are held to be benami can be acquired by a prescribed authority and no money shall
be paid for such acquisition. The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 i. The Act states that an
offence of money laundering has been committed if a person is a party to any process connected
with the proceeds of crime and projects such proceeds as untainted property. “Proceeds of crime”
means any property obtained by a person as a result of criminal activity related to certain offences
listed in the schedule to the Act. A person can be charged with the offence of money laundering only
if he has been charged with committing a scheduled offence. ii. The penalty for committing the
offence of money laundering is rigorous imprisonment for three to seven years and a fine of upto Rs
5 lakh. If a person is convicted of an offence under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances
Act, 1985 the term of imprisonment can extend upto 10 years. iii. The Adjudicating Authority,
appointed by the central government, shall decide whether any of the property attached or seized is
involved in money laundering. An Appellate Tribunal shall hear appeals against the orders of the
Adjudicating Authority and any other authority under the Act. iv. Every banking company, financial
institution and intermediary shall maintain a record of all transactions of a specified nature and
value, and verify and maintain records of all its customers, and furnish such information to the
specified authorities. Process to investigate and prosecute corrupt public servants i. The three main
authorities involved in inquiring, investigating and prosecuting corruption cases are the Central
Vigilance Commission (CVC), the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the state Anti-Corruption
Bureau (ACB). Cases related to money laundering by public servants are investigated and prosecuted
by the Directorate of Enforcement and the Financial Intelligence Unit, which are under the Ministry
of Finance. ii. The CBI and state ACBs investigate cases related to corruption under the Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1988 and the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The CBI’s jurisdiction is the central
government and Union Territories while the state ACBs investigates cases within the states. States
can refer cases to the CBI. iii. The CVC is a statutory body that supervises corruption cases in
government departments. The CBI is under its supervision. The CVC can refer cases either to the
Central Vigilance Officer (CVO) in each department or to the CBI. The CVC or the CVO recommends
the action to be taken against a public servant but the decision to take any disciplinary action against
a civil servant rests on the department authority. iv. Prosecution can be initiated by an investigating
agency only after it has the prior sanction of the central or state government. Government
appointed prosecutors undertake the prosecution proceeding in the courts. v. All cases under the
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 are tried by Special Judges who are appointed by the central or
state government.

UNIT 4: A- Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) is an apex
Indian governmental body created in 1964 to address governmental corruption. It has the status of
an autonomous body, free of control from any executive authority, charged with monitoring all
vigilance activity under the Central Government of India, advising various authorities in central
Government organizations in planning, executing, reviewing and reforming their vigilance work.**It
was set up by the Government of India in February, 1964 on the recommendations of the Committee
on Prevention of Corruption, headed by Shri K. Santhanam Committee, to advise and guide Central
Government agencies in the field of vigilance. Nittoor Srinivasa Rau, was selected as the first Chief
Vigilance Commissioner of India.**The Annual Report of the CVC not only gives the details of the
work done by it but also brings out the system failures which leads to corruption in various
Departments/Organisations, system improvements, various preventive measures and cases in which
the Commission's advises were ignored etc. Commission consist of:  CVC Chairperson;  Not more
than two Vigilance Commissioners – Members.**ROLE The CVC is not an investigating agency. The
only investigation carried out by the CVC is that of examining Civil Works of the Government which is
done through the Chief Technical Officer.**Corruption investigations against government officials
can proceed only after the government permits them. The CVC publishes a list of cases where
permissions are pending, some of which may be more than a year old.**The Ordinance of 1998
conferred statutory status to the CVC and the powers to exercise superintendence over functioning
of the Delhi Special Police Establishment, and also to review the progress of the investigations
pertaining to alleged offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 conducted by them. In
1998 the Government introduced the CVC Bill in the Lok Sabha in order to replace the Ordinance,
though it was not successful. The Bill was reintroduced in 1999 and remained with the Parliament till
September 2003, when it became an Act after being duly passed in both the Houses of Parliament.
The CVC has also been publishing a list of corrupt government officials against which it has
recommended punitive action. Appointment CVC and the Vigilance Commissioners are appointed by
the President after obtaining the recommendation of a Committee consisting of:  The Prime
Minister of India (Chairperson)  The Minister of Home Affairs  The Leader of the second largest
party in the Lok Sabha or majority group leader in parliament. Removal CVC or any Vigilance
Commissioner can be removed from his office only by order of the President on the ground of
proved misbehavior or incapacity after the SC, on a reference made to it by the President, has, on
inquiry, reported that the CVC or any Vigilance Commissioner, as the case may be, ought to be
removed. The President may suspend from office, and if deem necessary prohibit also from
attending the office during inquiry, the CVC or any Vigilance Commissioner in respect of whom a
reference has been made to the SC until the President has passed orders on receipt of the report of
the Supreme Court on such reference. The President may, by order, remove from office the Central
Vigilance Commissioner or any Vigilance Commissioner if the Central Vigilance Commissioner or such
Vigilance Commissioner, as the case may be:  is adjudged an insolvent; or  has been convicted of
an offence which, in the opinion of the Central Government, involves moral turpitude; or  engages
during his term of office in any paid employment outside the duties of his office; or  is, in the
opinion of the President, unfit to continue in office by reason of infirmity of mind or body; or  has
acquired such financial or other interest as is likely to affect prejudicially his functions as a CVC or a
Vigilance Commissioner. B- Central Bureau of Investigation is known as the CBI, originally set up as
the Special Police Establishment (SPE) in 1941 to investigate cases of bribery and corruption
involving the employees of the War and Supply Department of the Government of India during the
Second World War. **Even after the war was over, the need to continue the agency to investigate
corruption charges involving government servants was felt. The Delhi Special Police Establishment
Act was passed in 1946 to give the organisation a statutory base. Its jurisdiction was extended to
cover cases of corruption involving employees of all departments of the Government of India. **The
role of the SPE was gradually extended and by 1963, it was authorised to investigate offences under
97 Sections of the Indian Penal Code, offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and 16 other
Central Acts. CBI Consists of the Following Divisions : (i) Anti-Corruption Division (ii) Economic
Offences Division (iii) Special Crimes Division (iv) Legal Division (v) Coordination Division (vi)
Administration Division (vii) Policy and Organisation Division (viii) Technical Division (ix) Central
Forensic Science Laboratory. **The legal powers of investigation of the CBI are derived from the
Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (DPSE Act). **The organisation can investigate only such
offences as are notified by the central government under Section 3 of the DPSE Act. The powers,
duties, privileges and liabilities of the members of the organisation are the same as those of the
police officers of the union territories in relation to the notified offences. **While exercising such
powers, members of the CBI of and above the rank of Sub- Inspectors are deemed to be officers in
charge of the police station. The Central Government is authorised to extend the powers and
jurisdiction of the members of CBI to any area, including railway areas, for the investigation of
offences notified under Section 3 of the District Special Police Establishment Act, subject to the
consent of the government of the concerned state. **Even though the CBI has been in existence for
so long, it is still governed by the old Delhi Special Police Establishment Act of 1946 section 4 (1) of
this Act vests the superintendence over the organisation in the Central Government. An important
development in this regard occurred in December, 1997 when the Supreme Court delivered its
judgement in Writ Petitions (Criminal) Nos. 340-343 of 1993, commonly known as the Havala Case.
**The Court directed that the responsibility of exercising superintendence over the CBI should be
entrusted to the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) and that the CVC should be given a statutory
status. The judgement of the apex court is yet to be implemented. The CVC Bill has not yet been
passed. C- Criminal Investigation Department (CID) is the investigation and intelligence wing of the
Indian State Police. **Formation and Organization The CID was created by the British Government
in 1902, based on the recommendations of the Police Commission.In 1929, the CID was split into
Special Branch, CID and the Crime Branch CID (CB-CID). CID branches The CID has several branches
which work from state to state. These branches include: CB- CID  Anti-Human Trafficking & Missing
Persons Cell  Anti-Narcotics Cell  Finger Print Bureau  CID  Anti-Terrorism wing. Crime Branch
CID CB-CID is a special wing in the CID headed by the Additional Director General of Police (ADGP)
and assisted by the Inspector General of Police (IGP). This branch investigates serious crimes
including riots, forgery, counterfeiting and cases entrusted to CB-CID by the state government or the
High Court.