IPC Section 168 - Public Servant Unlawfully Engaging in Trade
Whoever, being a public servant, and being legally bound as such public servant not to engage in trade, engages in trade, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.
Official Text
“Whoever, being a public servant, and being legally bound as such public servant not to engage in trade, engages in trade, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.”
Legal Analysis
Elements to Prove:
- The accused was a public servant.
- They were legally bound not to engage in trade.
- They engaged in trade despite the prohibition.
- The trade activity was substantial and regular.
Potential Defenses:
- The accused was not a public servant.
- No legal prohibition existed.
- The activity was not trade.
- The accused was acting under authorization.
Practical Examples
What Constitutes the Offense:
A government official running a private business in violation of service rules, or a judge owning shares in companies.
What Doesn't Constitute:
A public servant investing in mutual funds, or owning inherited property.
Important Case Laws
State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Anil Vasantrao Deshmukh (2021)
The Supreme Court held that this section applies when public servants violate rules prohibiting them from engaging in trade or business activities.
Punishment
Simple imprisonment for up to 1 year, or Fine, or both
Related Information
Connected Sections:
This section deals with conflict of interest and prohibited business activities. It is often charged alongside other misconduct offenses.
Procedural Aspects:
Prosecution requires sanction from the competent authority. The case is triable by a Magistrate of the first class.