THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.7239 of 2008 The present Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (for short Cr.P.C.) requesting the Court for quashing the proceedings in C.C.No.238 of 2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Narsapur, Medak District. 2. The counsel appearing for the petitioner urged that the ingredients of Sections 420, 406, 426, 465 and 488 IPC are not made out in the complaint as well as the investigation made by the police. He also further urged that except the evidence of L.Ws.1 and 2, whose statements were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., no documentary evidence is produced and no persons relating to the subject matter are examined by the police and the complaint also did not disclose the offence proper and the petitioner submitted his resignation on 31.10.2007 and the same was accepted by the company. Thereafter, a private complaint was filed on 17.03.2008 and the same was referred under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. to the police and police in turn registered the case on 21.03.2008 and even assuming the allegations in the complaint, for arguments sake, admitted to be true, the facts and circumstances will clearly falls under the Civil nature. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor per contra urged that it is alleged by the complainant that the petitioner misappropriated an amount of Rs.17,51,880/- while he was an employee in defacto complainant’s firm, unless a full-fledged trial is taken up, it cannot be come to the conclusion the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the complaint. 4. Now, the point for consideration is: Whether the petitioner is entitled for quashing of the proceedings in C.C.No.238 of 2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Narsapur, Medak District ? P O I N T: 5. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner/accused was appointed as an employee of the complainant company and worked under different capacities for the last eight years. It is also an admitted fact that he discontinued his employment in the said company abruptly from the month of October, 2007. The complaint was filed under Sections 420, 406, 426, 465 and 488 IPC. In the complaint, only five documents filed. Police after receipt of the complaint forwarded by the Court examined two witnesses, who were cited as L.Ws.1 and 2. 6. As per the averments in the complaint that the petitioner was appointed as incharge for promoting the marketing of the complainant’s products in the South India and who used to procure the raw material and also supply the products of the complainant to its distributors, and that whatever the transactions on behalf of the complainant has to be reported to the complainant periodically and also all the collections received from the debtors forthwith to the complainant. Unfortunately the petitioner/accused with malafide intention to cheat and misappropriate the funds of the complainant with ultimate intention to enrich himself, started diverting the funds of the complainant by collecting the amounts from the debtors of the complainant. Though the petitioner/accused collected the amounts did not account for to the complainant and even in some cases he colluded with the creditors and to effect the interest of the complainant started giving receipts without effecting consideration under the said receipts to the complainant. The said fact has came to light to the complainant during the month of December, 2007. 7. It is also their case that the accused submitted false bills and on verification of the same, the complainant came to the conclusion that an amount of Rs.17,51,880/- was misappropriated and not accounted for though he collected the same from the market. It is the positive assertion of the complainant that the accused while working in their firm misappropriated the aforesaid amount. The alleged misappropriation will be known only when the evidence is adduced in the Court. Unless a full-fledged trial is taken up, it cannot be decided at the threshold itself to give any finding about the alleged misappropriation. The Court has to see whether there is any prima- facie material to proceed against the accused in view of the filing of the charge sheet. On perusal of the averments in the charge sheet, there is a prima-facie material to proceed against the accused. The truth or otherwise of the alleged misappropriation will be known after due trial of the matter. In the said circumstances giving any finding on that score is premature one. 8. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. ____________________ K.S.APPA RAO, J 22nd March, 2011 KSP