1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR Mukhraj Meena V/s. State of Rajasthan S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.2339/2006 S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Date of Order :: November 20, 2010 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.CHAUHAN Mr. V.S. Chauhan for the petitioner. Mr. Piyush Kumar PP for the State. The petitioner has approached this Court for quashing of FIR No.309/2006 registered at Police Station Lalsot, District Dausa for offence under Section 409 IPC. The brief facts of the case are that on 18.07.2006 the Tehsildar, Lalsot had lodged a report at Police Station Lalsot, District Dausa against the present petitioner for misappropriation of Government fund and for offence under Section 409 IPC. The petitioner has sought quashing of the said FIR ostensibly on the ground that the petitioner was working as a cashier during the period of 06.09.2001 to 04.01.2002. According to the FIR, Rs.56,000/- has been shown to be distributed to the road victims. In fact, this amount is Rs.66,000/- as is clear from the letter written by the Tehsildar to the Collector, Dausa. Further, amount of Rs.1,09,000/- was advanced to the then Tehsildar. But the same has not been adjusted at the time of auditing. Therefore, this amount has wrongly been shown to be embezzled. Moreover, Rs.20,000/- were also advanced to the Junior Engineer. Thus, total amount of Rs.1,39,000/- has properly been mentioned in the record and it 2 cannot be said that the petitioner has committed any embezzlement. So far the question of Rs.800/-, as mentioned in the FIR, is concerned, the petitioner is ready to deposit the same. Thus, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, a vague FIR has been lodged against the petitioner and no offence under Section 409 IPC has been made out against the petitioner. The learned Public Prosecutor has contended that the amount has been disbursed to others or is alleged to have been embezzled by the petitioner is a matter of investigation. Therefore, at this initial stage, this Court should not interfere with the investigation. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. It is, indeed, trite to state that this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. vis-a-vis quashing of FIR is extremely limited one. Repeatedly the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the Court should not interfere in the investigation process as the same is prerogative of the police. In case, the petitioner has a justification, he is free to bring it to the notice of the Investigating Officer. The objections narrated by the learned counsel are the plausible defence that the petitioner can raise during the course of trial. However, the same cannot be expected by this Court on the initial stage. Therefore, this petition is devoid of any merit; it is, hereby, dismissed. (R.S.CHAUHAN)J. A.Asopa/-