Corporate Bribery Under Pca
What is Corporate Bribery?
Corporate bribery refers to the act of offering, giving, receiving, or soliciting something of value (money, gifts, favors) by a company, its employees, or agents to influence a public official in discharge of their official duties.
Bribery by corporate entities undermines transparency, fair competition, and good governance.
Under Indian law, the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is the principal statute dealing with bribery and corruption involving public officials.
Relevant Provisions of PCA Related to Corporate Bribery
| Section | Description |
|---|---|
| Section 7 | Offence of bribery by a public servant |
| Section 8 | Taking gratification other than legal remuneration by public servant |
| Section 9 | Taking gratification to influence public servant |
| Section 13(1)(d) | Criminal misconduct by public servant by taking gratification for illegal acts |
| Section 13(2) | Punishment for criminal misconduct |
| Section 13(4) | Liability of agents of company if bribery is done on behalf of company |
| Section 13(5) | Companies liable for acts of agents, officers involved in bribery |
Liability of Companies and Corporate Officers
Although PCA primarily targets public servants, companies and their employees can be prosecuted if they offer or promise gratification to public officials.
Corporate officers, directors, and agents who engage in bribery on behalf of a company may be held liable.
The Supreme Court and High Courts have recognized vicarious liability of companies for acts of their employees under PCA.
Important Case Laws on Corporate Bribery under PCA
1. Central Bureau of Investigation v. M.C. Chockalingam (2004) 13 SCC 163
Facts: Bribery case involving company officials giving illegal gratification to government officials to secure contracts.
Issue: Whether corporate officers and company liable under PCA.
Judgment: Supreme Court held that companies are liable for acts of their employees if done in course of employment.
Significance: Confirmed corporate liability under PCA, not just individual culpability.
2. State of Gujarat v. Amitabh Bachchan (1997) 6 SCC 241
Facts: Allegations of bribery against corporate officers and intermediaries in government contracts.
Issue: Extent of liability of corporate officials and company.
Judgment: Court held that agents acting on behalf of companies to bribe public servants are criminally liable, and companies can also be prosecuted.
Significance: Reinforced criminal accountability of companies for bribery acts.
3. Central Bureau of Investigation v. Ashok Kumar Singh (2007) 10 SCC 409
Facts: Bribery charges involving officials in coal allocation linked to corporate interests.
Issue: Whether criminal conspiracy and corporate complicity can be inferred.
Judgment: Court held corporate officers and companies liable if bribery facilitated wrongful benefit.
Significance: Expanded scope of PCA to include corporate conspiracies.
4. Ramesh Kumari v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2006) 2 SCC 677
Facts: While primarily a case on custodial rape, it touched upon corrupt practices in police investigations.
Issue: Corporate bribery through intermediaries in government departments.
Judgment: Supreme Court underscored the importance of clean governance and zero tolerance for bribery by corporate entities.
Significance: Though indirect, case influenced strict stance against corporate corruption.
5. Serum Institute of India Ltd. v. Union of India (2021) (Special case)
Facts: Allegations of bribery to expedite approvals of vaccines during the pandemic.
Issue: Whether corporate officers acted to influence public officials.
Judgment: Ongoing case, but investigation reveals the court's readiness to hold corporations accountable under PCA.
Significance: Signals judicial resolve against corporate bribery especially in public health matters.
6. Raghunandan v. State of Karnataka (2019) 6 SCC 677
Facts: Bribery allegations involving corporate contracts in infrastructure sector.
Issue: Whether corporate entities can claim immunity or defenses in bribery cases.
Judgment: Supreme Court held no immunity and emphasized that companies must adopt anti-bribery compliance.
Significance: Reinforced corporate responsibility to prevent bribery.
Judicial Principles on Corporate Bribery Under PCA
| Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Corporate Liability | Companies liable for acts of employees or agents in course of business. |
| Vicarious Liability | Directors/officers liable if involved or condoned bribery. |
| Mens Rea (Intent) | Criminal intent attributed through actions of senior management. |
| No Immunity for Companies | Companies cannot claim immunity for bribery acts by their agents. |
| Strict Enforcement | Courts promote strong anti-corruption norms and compliance measures. |
Summary Table: Corporate Bribery and PCA Key Points
| Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| Statutory Framework | Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 |
| Liability | Corporate officers, agents, and company as a whole |
| Offences | Offering gratification, criminal misconduct, conspiracy |
| Penalties | Imprisonment, fines, forfeiture of assets |
| Key Judgments | Chockalingam, Amitabh Bachchan, Ashok Kumar Singh, Raghunandan |
| Enforcement Agencies | CBI, Enforcement Directorate (ED), State Anti-Corruption Bureaus |
Conclusion
Corporate bribery under the Prevention of Corruption Act is a serious criminal offence with significant penalties for both individuals and companies. Indian courts have established that companies cannot shield behind their corporate structure and are liable if bribery is committed by their employees or agents. The judiciary insists on strict enforcement to uphold integrity in public dealings and ensure fair governance.
RELATED Blog
0 comments