Crl. Misc. No. M-1624 of 2011 (O&M) (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-1624 of 2011 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 11.02.2011 Vinod Kumar and another ..........Petitioners Versus State of Haryana ..........Respondent BEFORE:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present:- Mr. Surender Saini, Advocate for the petitioners. **** DAYA CHAUDHARY, J. Crl. Misc. No. 2986 of 2011 Application is allowed as prayed for. Crl. Misc. No. M-1624 of 2011 The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of Vinod Kumar and Naresh Kumar Yadav for quashing of FIR No. 21 dated 24.8.2011 registered under Sections 409,420,467,468,471 and 120-B IPC at Police Station SVB Rohtak and challan filed in the case subsequently. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that some of the allegations are against the Sarpanch and the case put up by the petitioners has not been considered by the Investigating agency and they were not associated with the inquiry and the same has been conducted at their back. Learned counsel further contends that it is not a case of embezzlement and no shortage was found with regard to amount as well as the material. Heard the arguments advanced by counsel for the petitioners Crl. Misc. No. M-1624 of 2011 (O&M) (2) and have also gone through the contents of the FIR, challan and other documents available on record. The details of the allegations with regard to role of the petitioners have been mentioned in the FIR as well as in the challan. Not only the shortage of the material has been found in the investigation conducted by the police but the embezzlement has been found with regard to amount spent and the record maintained by the present petitioners. The only argument raised by learned counsel for the petitioners that the justification given by the petitioners has not been considered and it was the duty of the Sarpanch to assess the construction material properly, is not sufficient at this stage, as the allegations in the FIR as well as the facts which come in the investigation, would be proved by leading evidence. Admittedly, in this case, only challan has been presented and the case is fixed for framing of the charge before the trial Court. Since, charges have not been framed so far, no ground is made out to quash the aforesaid FIR. The petition being devoid of any merit is hereby dismissed. However, the petitioner can raise all the pleas before the trial Court at the time of framing of the charge. February 11, 2011 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) pooja JUDGE Note:-Whether this case is to be referred to the Reporter .......Yes/No