Revision summary
Dilemmas: an honest account may prosecute the driver and sink a critical deal; silence or a lie may save the deal and abandon the rider. Stakeholders include the victim, both firms, the officer and future road users. Rejected options are amnesia, a silence-for-signature bargain, and flight. Response is medical help, a true statement of speed and loss of control, no coaching, and honest report to one's own company. A deal that requires perjury is not a deal worth keeping.
Model answer
Introduction
A bleeding stranger, a speeding host, and a deal that your firm needs are three duties in one car. The law of the road does not pause because a purchase order is unsigned.
Body
Stakeholders
- The injured motorcyclist, whose life and evidence window are closing.
- The manager of company B, who drove fast and lost control.
- You as the sole eyewitness and as manager of company A.
- Company A's workers and owners, who need the deal.
- Company B's owners, who did not authorise a hit-and-lie.
- The investigating officer and the court, who need a true witness.
- Other road users, who will meet this driver again if tonight is buried.
Ethical issues and values
- Right to life and justice for the injured versus loyalty to a commercial deal.
- Truth-telling versus a profitable silence.
- Integrity: an eyewitness who lies is an accessory to a false case, not a clever negotiator.
- Conflict of interest: your firm's gain is now tied to a man's escape from the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and criminal law.
- Compassion for the victim first; even the driver is a person, but he is not entitled to your perjury.
Dilemmas
- Truth versus deal: an honest statement may end the dinner contract and hurt your plant; a lie may save the contract and bury the rider.
- Loyalty to employer versus loyalty to law: the company pays your salary; it did not buy your tongue.
- Gratitude versus justice: he offered a lift; a lift is not a right to your silence.
- Certainty versus fear: you saw speed and loss of control; a lawyer may later twist you; fear of cross-examination is not a moral veto.
- Immediate rescue versus remaining to watch the story: if you only "manage the deal" while the rider bleeds, you have already chosen.
Options
- Option 1: Tell the officer you saw nothing, or that the motorcyclist was at fault, to save the deal.
- Merit: possible contract.
- Demerit: false evidence, possible later prosecution of you, and a victim without a witness. Rejected.
- Option 2: Bargain privately: you will stay silent if he signs tonight.
- Merit: looks like leverage.
- Demerit: extortion wearing a contract; still a lie to the police. Rejected.
- Option 3: Flee the scene to "avoid involvement".
- Merit: none that is ethical.
- Demerit: illegal and cowardly; you were in the car.
- Option 4: Ensure medical help, give a true statement of speed and loss of control, cooperate, inform your own company honestly, and pursue the deal later through another officer of B if B is still a lawful firm.
- Merit: life, law, and a clean career.
- Demerit: this deal may die; that is a cost, not a duty to lie.
Response
- First, the person on the road: first aid, 112 / 108, do not let the car leave if it is needed as evidence and if staying is safe.
- Do not accept coaching in the back seat. If he asks you to "say the brakes failed" or "the rider came from nowhere" when that is false, refuse once, clearly.
- To the law-enforcement officer: state what you perceived — high speed, loss of control, your position as passenger, lighting and road as you remember. Do not add what you did not see. Do not subtract the speed.
- You are not the judge of sentence. You are a witness. Strict accident law is the legislature's choice; it is not yours to nullify for a spare-parts order.
- Inform your senior in company A the same night: the deal is at risk because of an accident and because you will not lie. Ask to reopen with B's leadership, not with a frightened manager's secret.
- If B's firm punishes the truth by killing a lawful contract, that is information about B's ethics. A deal bought with perjury would have been a bad partner anyway.
- Do not sell the story to a newspaper for pressure. Process first.
- Support the victim's hospitalisation as a human being if you can do so without contaminating evidence or seeming to buy silence.
Justification
- The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Indian Penal Code / Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita provisions on rash driving exist so that a commercial dinner is not a licence to maim.
- Professional ethics for a manager includes not committing or abetting an offence in the firm's name.
- The stem's "immense importance" of the deal is a test of whether importance can launder a lie. It cannot.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD HIT[Speeding hit] --> LIFE[Aid the rider] HIT --> DIL[Truth versus deal] DIL --> TRUE[Honest eyewitness account] DIL --> LIE[Save the contract] LIE --> CRIME[False evidence] TRUE --> LATER[Deal via clean channel or no deal]
Conclusion
The dilemmas are truth versus contract, gratitude versus justice, and employer loyalty versus the injured stranger. Rescue, tell the speed as you saw it, refuse a coached story, and let the deal live or die in daylight. A purchase order is not worth a false witness.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
If I am not a forensic expert, should I refuse to speak?
Speak to what you perceived: speed, control, seating. Do not invent physics. Silence about obvious speeding is already a kind of speech.
-
Can my company fire me for sinking the deal?
A firm may be unjust. Lying for them is still a crime and a stain. Report internally; keep your own record of the true statement.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2017 · Q9 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. A building permitted for three floors, while being extended illegally to 6 floors by a builder, collapses. As a consequence, a number of innocent labourers including women and children died. These labourers are migrants of different places. The government immediately announced cash relief to the aggrieved families and arrested the builder. Give reasons for such incidents taking place across the country. Suggest measures to prevent their occurrence. -
2017 · Q10 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. You are an honest and responsible civil servant. You often observe the following: (a) There is a general perception that adhering to ethical conduct one may face difficulties to oneself and cause problems for the family, whereas unfair practices may help to reach the career goals. (b) When the number of people adopting unfair means is large, a small minority having a penchant towards ethical means makes no difference. (c) Sticking to ethical means is detrimental to the larger developmental goals (d) While one may not involve oneself in large unethical practices, but giving and accepting small gifts makes the system more efficient. Examine the above statements with their merits and demerits. -
2017 · Q11 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. You are aspiring to become an IAS officer and you have cleared various stages and now you have been selected for the personal interview. On the day of the interview, on the way to the venue you saw an accident where a mother and child who happen to be your relatives were badly injured. They needed immediate help. What would you have done in such a situation? Justify your action. -
2017 · Q12 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. You are a Public Information Officer (PIO) in a government department. You are aware that the RTI Act 2005 envisages transparency and accountability in administration. The act has functioned as a check on the supposedly arbitrarily administrative behaviour and actions. However, as a PIO you have observed that there are citizens who filed RTI applications not for themselves but on behalf of such stakeholders who purportedly want to have access to information to further their own interests. At the same time there are these RTI activists who routinely file RTI applications and attempt to extort money from the decision makers. This type of RTI activism has affected the functioning of the administration adversely and also possibly jeopardises the genuineness of the applications which are essentially aimed at getting justice. What measures would you suggest to separate genuine and non-genuine applications? Give merits and demerits of your suggestions. -
2017 · Q13 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. You are the head of the Human Resources department of an organization. One day one of the workers died on duty. His family was demanding compensation. However, the company denied compensation because it was revealed in investigation that he was drunk at the time of the accident. The workers of the company went on to strike demanding compensation for the family of the deceased. The Chairman of the management board has asked for your recommendation. What recommendation would you provide to the management? Discuss the merits and demerits of each of the recommendation. -
2016 · Q9 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. ABC Ltd. is a large transnational company having diversified business activities with a huge shareholder base. The company is continuously expanding the generating employment. The company, in its expansion and diversification programme, decides to establish a new plant at Vikaspuri, an area which is underdeveloped. The new plant is designed to use energy efficient technology that will help the company to save production cost by 20%. The company's decision goes well with the Government policy of attracting investment to develop such underdeveloped regions. The government has also announced tax holiday for five years for the companies that invest in underdeveloped areas. However, the new plant may bring chaos for the inhabitants of Vikaspuri region, which is otherwise tranquil. The new plant may result in increased cost of living, aliens migrating to the region, disturbing the social and economic order. The company sensing the possible protest tried to educate the people of Vikaspuri region and public in general that how its Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) policy would help overcome the likely difficulties of the residents of Vikaspuri region. In spite of this the protests begin and some of the residents decided to approach the judiciary as their plea before the Government did not yield any result. (a) Identify the issues involved in the case. (b) What can be suggested to satisfy the company's goal and to address the residents' concern? -
2016 · Q10 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. Saraswati was a successful IT professional in USA. Moved by patriotic sense of doing something for the country she returned to India. Together with some other like-minded friends, she formed an NGO to build a school for a poor rural community. The objective of the school was to provide the best quality modern education at a nominal cost. She soon discovered that she has to seek permission from a number of Government agencies. The rules and procedures were quite confusing and cumbersome. What frustrated her most were delays, callous attitude of officials and constant demand for bribes. Her experience and the experience of many others like her have deterred people from taking up social service projects. A measure of Government control over voluntary social work is necessary. But it should not be exercised in a coercive a corrupt manner. What measures can you suggest to ensure that due control is exercised but well meaning, honest NGO efforts are not thwarted? -
2016 · Q11 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. A fresh engineering graduate gets a job in a prestigious chemical industry. She likes the work. The salary is also good. However, after a few months she accidentally discovers that a highly toxic waste is being secretly discharged into a river nearby. This is causing health problems to the villagers downstream who depend on the river for their water needs. She is perturbed and mentions her concern to her colleagues who have been with the company for longer periods. They advise her to keep quite as anyone who mentions the topic is summarily dismissed. She cannot risk losing her job as she is the sole beard-winner for her family and has to support her ailing parents and siblings. At first, she thinks that if her seniors are keeping quiet, why should she stick out her neck. But her conscience pricks her to do something to save the river and the people who depend upon it. At heart she feels that the advice of silence given by her friends is not correct though she cannot give reasons for it. She thinks you are a wise person and seeks your advice. (a) What arguments can you advance to show her that keeping quiet is not morally right? (b) What course of action would you advice her to adopt and why?
More from this paper
Q1 · UPSC Mains 2017 · GS IV · 10 marks
Conflict of interest in the public sector arises when (a) official duties, (b) public interest, and (c) personal interest are taking priority one above the other. How can this conflict in administration be resolved? Describe with an example. (150 Words, 10).
Ethics in Public Administration
Conflict of interest is a clash among official duty, public interest and personal interest, not only a caught bribe. Public interest must lead; duty is the lawful means; personal interest must be last and declared. Resolution uses disclosure, recusal, reduced discretion, speaking orders and enforcement of Conduct Rules. An example is a District Magistrate who recuses from a mining lease in which a relative has a stake. A medical officer steering patients to a spouse's lab is the same conflict in a smaller room.
Q2 · UPSC Mains 2017 · GS IV · 10 marks
Examine the relevance of the following in the context of civil service: (150 Words, 10) (a) Transparency (b) Accountability (c) Fairness and justice (d) Courage of conviction (e) Spirit of service.
Probity in Governance
Transparency is lawful openness of rules, queues and reasons so that bribes lose their dark room. Accountability is the duty to explain a file to superiors, auditors, courts and citizens. Fairness and justice are equal treatment plus hearing and reasons, rooted in Article 14 and natural justice. Courage of conviction is a recorded lawful no under pressure, not rude stubbornness. Spirit of service is treating the citizen as the purpose of the post, which completes the other four.
Q3 · UPSC Mains 2017 · GS IV · 10 marks
Young people with ethical conduct are not willing to come forward to join active politics. Suggest steps to motivate them to come forward. (150 Words, 10).
Ethics and Human Interface
Honest youth avoid active politics because of money, muscle, closed tickets, smears and a culture that calls all politics dirty. Motivation needs inner-party democracy, cheaper campaigns, faster justice, disclosure that voters use, and local offices as a first step. Education should teach the Constitution as a craft, not as a reason to stay home. Parties must select on record, not only on family. Ethics in politics is entry plus reform, not a vow of absence.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.