1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1032 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders. Mr.Dilip Bodake, for the petitioner. Mrs.A.S.Pai, APP, for the respondents- State. CORAM: D.B.BHOSALE AND R.V.MORE, JJ. DATE : 19/04/2010 PC: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. By this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the order/letter dated 22.10.2008, bearing Outward No.1875/08 issued by the Police Sub Inspector, Madha Police Station, Madha, Dist- Solapur. The petitioner is also seeking direction to the police station to register an offence against the officers of the co- T 2 operative department, named in the complaints dated 20.5.08, 27.508, 29.5.08, 14.8.08 and 23.9.08 and take action against them in accordance with law. By letter dated 22.10.2008 the petitioner was informed that no cognizable or non cognizable offence can be registered against the officers named in the aforesaid letters/complaints. Mr Bodke, learned counsel for the petitioner, after inviting our attention to the contents of the petition so also to its annexures, submitted that the officers named in the complaints accepted felicitation from the cooperative society against which an inquiry under section 83(1) of the Maharashtra co-operative Societies Act,1960 had been initiated. He submitted that acceptance of the facilitation by the officers of the Co- operative department was not only 3 improper but it amounts to corruption as contemplated by section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and an offence under section 168 of IPC. We have perused the petition so also the annexures and the impugned letter/order dated 22.10.2008. Apart from the fact that the petitioner has raised disputed questions of fact, even if it is assumed that the officers were felicitated or they accepted the felicitation, that by itself, in our opinion, would not attract the provisions of section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and section 168 of IPC. The conduct of the officers would, at the most, invite disciplinary action against them. As a matter of fact,this court is informed that the Commissioner of Co- operative Societies, Government of Maharashtra, issued warning to all those officers and told them to avoid such incidents in future. That apart, the petitioner has not made any allegation of favouritism against these officers. In the 4 circumstances, we find no merit in the contentions urged on behalf of the petitioner. The writ petition accordingly fails and dismissed as such. (R.V.MORE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) 5