1 283411 vgm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITON NO. 2834 OF 2011 Subhash Tukaram Shinde ...Petitioner V/s. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents Mr. S.R. Ganbavale for the Petitioner Mr. J.P. Yagnik, A.P.P., for the State CORAM: A.M. KHANWILKAR AND P.D. KODE, JJ DATE: OCTOBER 21, 2011 P.C.:- Heard the counsel for the petitioner as well as the A.P.P. 2. Broadly, two points have been urged before us in support of the relief of quashing of F.I.R.: The first contention is that the complainant had no connection whatsoever with the contract, and, therefore, would have no locus to complain about the offences under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of 2 283411 Corruption Act, 1988. We find no merit in this argument. No provision is brought to our notice, which requires that the complaint in respect of the alleged offence should necessarily be filed by the contractor himself. The allegation in the F.I.R. is about the demand made by the petitioner. That is a matter which is relevant for trial, and cannot be the basis for quashing of F.I.R. 3. The second argument is that, under clause 26 of the contract, sub-letting or assignment of the contract is not permissible. According to the petitioner, the contract was given to M/s. Dhanmala Construction. Relying on the contract documents, it was argued that the petitioner, at best, can be held responsible for providing assistance to the complainant. That is a defence which can be taken by the petitioner at the trial. We are afraid, such argument cannot be the basis to quash the F.I.R. 4. Taking over all view of the matter, therefore, no case for quashing of F.I.R. is made out. Hence, this petition fails, and the same is dismissed. 3 283411 5. We, however, make it clear that observations made in this order will not come in the way of the petitioner to pursue such other remedy before the trial Court or, for that matter, during the trial, as the case may be. All questions will have to be decided on their own merits, in accordance with law. P.D. KODE, J. A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.