15. The learned counsel for the C.B.I., on the other hand, submits that although at the initial stage of filing of the F.I.R., the allegation was made in connection with large scale embezzlement of public money relating to execution of work under Road Construction Department, but after investigation, larger conspiracy was found and it was found that even at the stage of entering into the agreement, the second bidder for each work entered into criminal conspiracy with the common bidder of the various works, namely, M/s Classic Coal Constriction Private Limited by forming a cartel and becoming a dummy bidder, in order to facilitate award of the work to M/s Classic Coal Constriction Private Limited. This act by itself facilitated the work to be awarded to M/s Classic Coal Constriction Private Limited, who in turn, raised fake bills of bitumen and embezzled huge public money. He further submits that merely because the allegation in relation to formation of cartel can also be inquired into by the authority under the Competition Act, 2002, that by itself does not mean that no criminal offence can arise out of the alleged transactions, if the basic ingredients of alleged offence under various provisions of Indian Penal Code is also made out. He has referred to Section 62 of the Competition Act, 2002 to submit that the provision of Competition Act, 2002 is in addition to and not in derogation of the provision of any other law for the time being in force. He submits that the legislature has consciously incorporated Section 62 in the Competition Act, 2002 to ensure that any violation of any other law, if found in any transaction, the proceedings under other laws are not excluded if the essential ingredients relating to such law is present in a case.
