UPSC Mains 2022 GS Paper 4 Q9: model answer
The Supreme Court has banned mining in the Aravalli Hills to stop degradation of the forest cover and to maintain ecological balance. However, the stone mining was still prevalent in the border district of the affected State with connivance of certain corrupt forest officials and politicians. Young and dynamic SP who was recently posted in the affected district promised to himself to stop this menace. In one of his surprise checks with his team, he found loaded truck with stone trying to escape the mining area. He tried to stop the truck but the truck driver overrun the police officer, killing him on the spot and thereafter managed to flee. Police filed FIR but no breakthrough was achieved in the case for almost three months. Ashok who was the Investigative Journalist working with leading TV channel, suo moto started investigating the case. Within one month, Ashok got breakthrough by interacting with local people, stone mining mafia and government officials. He prepared his investigative story and presented to the CMD of the TV channel. He exposed in his investigative report the complete nexus of stone mafia working with blessing of corrupt police and civil officials and politicians. The politician who was involved in the mafia was no one else but local MLA who was considered to be very close to the Chief Minister. After going through the investigative report, the CMD advised Ashok to drop the idea of making the story public through electronic media. He informed that the local MLA was not only the relative of the owner of the TV channel but also had unofficially 20 percent share in the channel. The CMD further informed Ashok that his further promotion and hike in pay will be taken care of in addition the soft loan of ₹ 10 lakhs which he has taken from the TV channel for his son's chronic disease will be suitably adjusted if he hands over the investigative report to him. (a) What are the options available with Ashok to cope up with the situation? (b) Critically evaluate/examine each of the options identified by Ashok. (c) What are the ethical dilemmas being faced by Ashok? (d) Which of the options, do you think, would be the most appropriate for Ashok to adopt and why? (e) In the above scenario, what type of training would you suggest for police officers posted to such districts where stone mining illegal activities are rampant?
What the question wants
Identify investigative journalist Ashok's options when his channel buries his exposé, evaluate them, name his dilemmas, choose one, and suggest training for police in illegal-mining districts.
How to structure it
Five sub-parts.
(a) Options
(b) Evaluation
(c) Dilemmas
(d) Choice
(e) Police training
How to think it through
Context: SC Aravalli mining ban (2009 Haryana; 2002 order). Real event: DSP Surender Singh killed by dumper in Nuh, July 2022 — exact parallel. Options: hand over report and take benefits; resign and publish elsewhere; publish on independent platforms/social media; share evidence with police/CBI/court/Lokayukta; approach Press Council? Choose: refuse the inducement, give evidence to investigating agency (via court? SIT), publish through another outlet after legal vetting, repay loan through other means; journalist ethics (Press Council norms). Training: integrity, investigation (forensic, financial trail), technology (drones, GPS, satellite mapping), legal (MMDR Act 1957 section 21; Forest Conservation Act; Environment Protection Act), safety protocols for raids, coordination with mining/forest, community intelligence, ethics and courage.
Model answer
Stakeholders
- The slain SP's family; the public and the Aravalli ecosystem; Ashok and his sick son; the TV channel, its CMD and owner; the MLA; corrupt officials; police.
Dilemmas
- Truth vs personal gain; son's treatment vs public interest; loyalty to employer vs journalistic duty.
Options
- Hand over the report; resign and publish elsewhere; give evidence to investigators; publish on independent platforms.
A police officer died under a truck because he tried to stop illegal mining. Burying the story that explains why would bury him a second time. In July 2022, a DSP was killed in just this way in Haryana's Nuh; the case is not fiction.
(a) Options
1. Hand over the report and accept the promotion and loan adjustment. 2. Resign and publish through another channel or newspaper.
3. Give the evidence to the investigating agency or the court monitoring the case. 4. Publish on an independent digital platform.
(b) Evaluation
- Hand over: solves his financial worries; but it is a bribe for silence, betrays the murdered officer, and makes him part of the nexus.
- Resign and publish elsewhere: preserves integrity; but costs his job when his son needs treatment.
- Evidence to investigators: helps justice directly; but if the police are compromised, it must go to a higher agency or the court.
- Independent platform: quick reach; but legal risk without vetting.
(c) Dilemmas
- Son's health vs truth.
- Loyalty to employer vs duty to the public.
- Fear vs courage.
(d) Most appropriate option
- Refuse the inducement and keep copies of the evidence safe.
- Give the evidence to a credible agency: the State's top police leadership, or seek transfer of the probe to the CBI through the court.
- Publish through another reputable outlet after legal vetting, and seek protection if threatened.
- Repay the loan honestly over time, rather than letting it buy his silence.
(e) Training for police in such districts
- Laws: the MMDR Act, 1957, forest and environment laws, and the Supreme Court's Aravalli orders.
- Technology: drones, satellite imagery, GPS tracking of trucks.
- Safe operations: protocols for stopping heavy vehicles, backup teams and barricades.
- Integrity and leadership modules, and coordination with forest and mining departments.
Ashok holds half of the shield; he must not hand it over.
Draw: A triangle of nexus (mafia, politicians, officials) with Ashok's report and police training as two arrows breaking it.
Keywords, cases and data to drop in
illegal stone mining, Aravalli, Supreme Court ban, Nuh DSP July 2022, investigative journalism, inducement, press freedom, evidence to investigators, CBI, legal vetting, MMDR Act 1957, drones, GPS, financial investigation, safe operations.
Where most answers lose marks
- Advising Ashok to hand over the report 'for his son', or skipping the police-training sub-question.
Related Mains PYQs
- A business house is working on a project that could displace a forest community from their habitat. As the administrative officer of… UPSC 2026 · GS-IV
- Owing to paucity of time, a university professor generates a Ph.D. evaluation report using Artificial Intelligence and submits it with some modifications.… UPSC 2026 · GS-IV
- An endangered tribe has developed a severe skeletal deformity. A university research has identified a mineral supplement as a possible remedy, though… UPSC 2026 · GS-IV
- Discuss how national security can be balanced with concerns of human rights. UPSC 2026 · GS-IV
Fresh examples from current affairs
Supreme Court: no prior approval under Section 17A needed to probe a bribe demand
In a judgment of 16 October 2026, a Supreme Court Bench of Justices S.V.N. Bhatti and N.V. Anjaria held that investigating a bribe demand by a public servant does not need prior approval under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Asking for a bribe, the court said, is not part of discharging official duties.
UPSC angle: Prelims: Sections 7, 7A, 17A and 19 of the PC Act. · Mains GS-II/GS-IV: honest officers versus accountability.
19 Oct 2026Learn the concept
Question text as printed in the official UPSC Civil Services (Main) question paper. The model answer is original Battle IAS work; use it to learn structure, not to memorise.
Want every PYQ in one place? See the Battle IAS PYQ Book.