Corruption Charges Demand Specialist Criminal Defence

An allegation under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — as significantly amended in 2018 — is among the most serious charges a public official, contractor, or private sector professional can face in India. Investigations are typically conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or state anti-corruption bureaus. The reputational and professional consequences begin before a chargesheet is even filed.

The 2018 amendment to the PC Act materially widened its reach. Bribe-givers are now directly liable under Section 8. Commercial organisations face corporate criminal liability under Section 9 where bribery is carried out for the organisation’s benefit. And the reversal of burden provisions, combined with mandatory minimum sentences for aggravated offences, make PC Act cases genuinely high-stakes from the moment an FIR is registered — or even earlier, from the moment the CBI initiates a preliminary enquiry.

Mr. Shailendra Singh and the team at August Attorneys LLP have handled anti-corruption matters across every stage of the process: from advising clients who have received CBI summons through to contested bail hearings, trial defence, and appeals before the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court of India. The firm’s background in white-collar and economic offence defence gives it a comprehensive understanding of how CBI investigations are structured, where they are most susceptible to legal challenge, and how to build a defence that holds.

Types of Anti-Corruption Matters We Handle

1

Trap Cases

A trap case involves a controlled operation by the CBI or anti-corruption bureau, typically following a complaint that a public servant is demanding a bribe. The operation uses marked currency and shadow witnesses, and the accused is apprehended at the point of accepting the alleged demand. Trap cases appear straightforward but are highly vulnerable to defence challenge. The prescribed procedure for conducting a trap — including how the complainant is briefed, how the shadow witness is positioned, how the money is marked, and how the accused is apprehended — must be followed precisely. Any deviation is a defence argument. Our review of the case diary in a trap matter begins with the procedure, not the facts.
2

Disproportionate Assets (DA) Cases

Under Section 13(1)(e) of the PC Act, a public servant who possesses assets disproportionate to known sources of income commits a criminal offence. DA cases are document-intensive: the prosecution presents its calculation of the accused's alleged assets; the defence presents the complete financial history — salary records, legitimate transactions, inheritance, family income, agricultural income, and other lawful receipts — to demonstrate that the assets are adequately explained. Mr. Shailendra Singh's background in corporate and financial law gives the firm a significant advantage in DA cases. We approach the financial analysis with the same rigour we would apply to a complex commercial dispute — building a complete and documented account of the accused's financial history that stands up to cross-examination.
3

Private Sector and Corporate Liability

Since the 2018 amendment, private individuals and companies that pay or offer bribes to public servants can be prosecuted under Sections 8 and 9. We advise companies on their compliance exposure, internal investigation protocols, and the legal consequences of bribery-related conduct by employees or agents. Where prosecution has been initiated, we provide full criminal defence representation.
4

CBI Investigations and Chargesheet

We represent clients from the preliminary enquiry stage — before an FIR is registered — through investigation, bail hearings, chargesheet filing, and trial before the designated Special CBI Court. Early engagement with legal counsel in a CBI investigation is not optional. It can determine what evidence is preserved, how witnesses are approached, and whether the client's legal position is protected throughout the process.

Anticipatory Bail in Corruption Matters

Where a person has reason to believe they may be arrested in connection with a corruption investigation, anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS (formerly Section 438 CrPC) is an important protection. In CBI and anti-corruption matters, such applications are typically contested vigorously by the prosecution.

The court considers the nature and gravity of the accusation, the applicant’s role, the risk of flight or evidence tampering, and — increasingly — the likelihood of success at trial. A well-prepared anticipatory bail application, with documented support for the applicant’s position on each of these considerations, significantly improves the prospects of relief.

Prosecution Sanction — A Critical First Checkpoint

Under Section 19 of the PC Act, prosecuting a serving or retired public servant requires prior sanction from the competent authority. The Supreme Court has held that this sanction is a jurisdictional prerequisite — not a formality. A sanction granted without genuine application of mind to the facts of the case, or by an authority that lacks competence, can be challenged and may result in the prosecution being stayed or quashed at an early stage.

We examine the sanction order in every PC Act matter as a matter of standard practice, before any other aspect of the defence is addressed.

  • Free initial case consultation included
  • Litigation value up to 2 million dollars
  • Affordable legal representation options
  • Client is legally challenged / under disability
  • Case involves multiple legal links to be removed

Have questions? talk to our eye specialist.

Can a retired public servant be prosecuted under the PC Act?

Yes. The PC Act applies to acts committed while the person was a public servant, regardless of whether they have since retired. Prosecution sanction for retired officials is required from the authority that would have been competent to remove them at the time the alleged offence was committed.

Under Section 9 of the PC Act (post-2018), a commercial organisation can be convicted if a person associated with it gives a bribe to obtain or retain business. The organisation’s only defence is that it had in place adequate procedures to prevent bribery. This is a significant compliance incentive for corporates

Statements recorded by a police officer (including CBI) under the CrPC are generally not admissible as confessions. However, any statement that leads to the discovery of facts is admissible under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. Statements made to a Magistrate under Section 164 CrPC are fully admissible. This is why legal counsel must be present or at minimum consulted before any statement is made to the CBI.

Talk to a Lawyer