1 S. B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 848/2008 HARI MOHAN SHARMA V. STATE OF RAJASTHAN. DATE: 17/09/2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. M. TOTLA Mr. Rajendra Charan , for Petitioner (s). Mr. S.N.Tiwari, PP, for the State. Issue notice. Learned Public Prosecutor accepts notice on behalf of the State. Petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 91/06 registered at Police Station Anti-Corruption Bureau, Jaipur, for the offences of Sections 7, 13 (1), (D), (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that even as per report of complainant initiating proceedings, there is no reason for demanding or payment of anything - earlier also, three times complainant tried to involve petitioner which all resulted in negative report by the investigating agency and a civil suit of recovery by bank is pending against complainant. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that (1) Reason for demand and payment, even alleged by the complainant, did not relate to petitioner – petitioner has nothing to do with rebate of sales tax and even for subsidy which is to be sanctioned and disbursed by other agencies – sale of the establishment of the complainant was Nil in all years, so no question of any rebate or remission – relating to alleged subsidy, the bank has filed a civil suit against complainant for recovery and petitioner is officer in Khadi Gramodhyog and FIR under investigation since more than two and half years. Learned Public Prosecutor, rebutting above contention, submitted that the alleged arguments are not to be gone into in this application and it is hardly a matter of investigation. 2 Considered. Looking to the submissions, this is not a fit case for order of direction under Section 482, Cr.P.C., The petition deserves rejection. The petition is rejected. Needless to say that the petitioner may, if so desires, raise objections at appropriate stage. (C. M. TOTLA), J. scd 3