HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.5522 OF 2007 DATE:24-09-2010 BETWEEN Mominige Anil Kumar …Petitioner AND State of A.P., By Sub-Inspector of Police, Rural Police Station, Nellore District, rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad & Another. …Respondents THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.5522 OF 2007 ORDER: This petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.273 of 2006 pending on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Venkatagiri, wherein he was charged for the offences under Sections 406, 409 read with Section 109 IPC. The contents of the charge sheet disclose that A.1-petitioner herein is the Assistant Project Manager of Velugu of Rapur; A.2 is Community coordinator of Velugu of Rapur; and A.3 and A.4 are members of Siddavaram Sanga Banda. An amount of Rs.83,450/- was released by the Project Director of D.R.D.O., Nellore to Siddavaram Sanga Banda for Community Investment Fund, and that the said amount was withdrawn by L.W.5 and L.W.6, who are the President and Secretary of Siddavaram Sanga Banda at the instance of A.2. From the amount, Rs.90,000/- was given to A.3 and A.4 by A.2, that A.2 got withdrawn an amount of Rs.90,000/- from the accounts of L.W.5. L.W.4 visited Siddavaram Sanga Banda of L.W.5 and found that the amount was withdrawn and it was not distributed to the other members of the Sanga Banda. Thus, it is alleged that all the accused misappropriated the amount by committing criminal breach of trust. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that this Court in Crl.P.No.5128 of 2007 quashed similar proceedings against the petitioner holding that no offence under Section 409 is made out as no property was entrusted to the petitioner, which is alleged to have been misappropriated. Therefore, the same applies to the facts of the present case and the impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed. I do not find any force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner for the reason that the petitioner was charged along with A.2 to A.4 for the offences under Sections 406, 409 read with 109 IPC as he abetted A.2 to A.4 in misappropriation of the funds, which were entrusted to him. The further contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that without prior sanction, the petitioner cannot be prosecuted for the alleged offences cannot be countenanced since the acts done by the petitioner are not in relation to performance of official duties. Therefore, I see no ground to quash the impugned proceedings. The Criminal Petition is accordingly dismissed. _________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. SEPTEMBER 24, 2010 Tsr.