abet each other in the offence of creating forged documents and used the forged documents as genuine in the purchase of HF data Modem. Further, in pursuance of the same, A1 and A2 permitted the petitioner company to qualify in the tender process for purchase of 105 HF Data Modem to the tune of Rs.1,74,24,000/- knowing fully well that the documents produced by the petitioner company were fake documents and the fake documents were prepared to fulfill the pre-qualification criteria (PQC), i.e. the bidder should have 3 years previous experience in similar field with minimum supply of 10 HF Data Modem. As regards this petitioner is concerned, the investigation proceeding on a wrong premises. The respondent police written to M/s.Prosys Celnet Pvt. Ltd. to verify the petitioner's credential. From the questionnaire and answers it is seen that M/s.Prosys Celnet Pvt. Ltd. had given a report in favour of the petitioner, wherein, they have clearly stated that purchase order for 12HF Data Modem Pactor-3 to V-Link Systems Pvt. Ltd. was issued by them and this was in the year 2012 and he had requisite qualification. As regards the second allegation, during the period from 2016 to 2017, A1 and A2 in collusion with the petitioner company had included additional precondition of voice quality, which was not the parameter at the time of issuance of tender, thereby the other tenderer, namely, M/s.Vertel Info Tech
