RAJENDRA SHINDE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants have raised a question of law in the present application as to whether demand without acceptance can be an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The applicants have filed the present application for quashing of the F.I.R. registered with Anti Corruption Bureau, Worli, Mumbai vide C.R. No. 25 of 2017 on 29th July, 2017 under Sections 7, 8 read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ("PC Act, 1988"). Admittedly, there was no acceptance of bribe amount by the applicants and therefore the question is posed before us as to whether any offence under the PC Act, 1988 is made out at all.

(2.) The F.I.R. was lodged on 29th July, 2017 by one Ravish Dwarkadas Maru. There is no dispute that applicants were public servants as the applicants nos.1 and 2 Rajendra Shinde and Sanjay B. Bramhankar were working as Chief Manager (Engineering) and Manager (Engineering) respectively in the Maharashtra State Agro Industries Development Corporation ("MAIDC"), which is a State Government Undertaking.

(3.) It is the case of the first informant that he was in the business of manufacturing HDPE pipes and used to supply the same to various Zilla Parishads through MAIDC. The payments for the said supplies were made to the first informant by the concerned ZPs through MAIDC. According to the first informant, an amount of Rs.2, 20, 00, 000/ was due from MAIDC payable to the first informant. Out of the said amount, the MAIDC released a payment of Rs.1, 30, 00, 000/ and for the same the applicants alongwith one private person Shinde (Paraswale) had accepted Rs.50, 000/ as the bribe amount from the first informant. An amount of Rs.90, 00, 000/ was remained to be paid to the first informant and to clear the said dues and for releasing the amount, according to the first informant, the applicants demanded 2% of the bill amount. On 12th July, 2017, the first informant had given written complaint to the Anti Corruption Bureau, Worli, Mumbai. The officers of the Anti Corruption Bureau ("ACB") then verified the complaint of the first informant. For that purpose, panch Shri. Dhavale and the first informant went to the office of MAIDC at Aarey Colony, Mumbai and met the present applicants. It is further stated in the first information report that they thereafter demanded bribe from the first informant and told him to pay the amount to aforementioned private person, Mr. Shinde (Paraswale).