THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CRIMINAL PETITION No.10961 OF 2010 DATED: 26.07.2011 ORDER: This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., for quashing the proceedings against the petitioner-A1 in C.C.No.1687 of 2008 on the file of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Narsispatnam. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. Perused the records. 3. Petitioner herein-A1 along with two others is facing the prosecution for the offences under Sections 409, 420, 467 and 468 r/w 34 IPC. 4. On a complaint given by the Assistant Accounts Officer, Electrical Revenue Office, Narsipatnam, police registered a case in Cr.No.66 of 2008 and after due investigation filed charge sheet against the petitioner-A1 and two others. According to the prosecution, petitioner- A1 worked as Upper Divisional Clerk in the Electrical Revenue Office and is responsible for maintaining and issuing the clearance certificates to the consumers and A2 was working under the control of A1, maintaining the Rectification register of the Electrical Revenue Office and that during a domestic enquiry conducted on 09.11.2006, it was found that A1 and A2 misappropriated and cheated the department to a tune of Rs.5,16,525/-. The details of all the amounts misappropriated year-wise are furnished in the charge sheet. It is specifically alleged in the charge sheet that A1 issued the clearance certificates without recovering the amounts from L.Ws.9 to 11, and A2 and A3 have abetted the commission of the offence. The charge sheet is filed in the year, 2008. It is not disputed that necessary charges were also framed against petitioner- A1 and two others and the trial has also commenced and P.W.1, the Assistant Accounts Officer, who gave the complaint and P.W.2 another Assistant Accounts Officer were also examined and also cross-examined. At this stage, petitioner-A1 has filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of further proceedings on the ground that in the departmental enquiry conducted, he was exonerated and in view of the said enquiry report, wherein it is held that the charges are not framed against him, the prosecution in respect of the same incident is unwarranted. 5. Petitioner-A1 has not challenged registration of the First Information Report nor the charge sheet filed after investigation. Having kept quiet all these years, the petitioner has now come forward with the present application after trial has commenced and P.Ws.1 and 2 were also examined. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to rely upon a decision of the apex Court in P.S.RAJYA v. STATE OF BIHAR [1], wherein it was observed that if the charge sheet is identical and could not be established in a departmental proceedings and in view of the admitted discrepancies in the reports submitted by the valuers, one wonders what is there further to proceed against the appellant in criminal proceedings. 7. In the above case, quashing of the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was sought immediately after cognizance was taken, which is not the situation in the present case. Further, the question as to whether or not the report of the departmental enquiry has any bearing over the criminal proceedings and whether or not the exoneration of the petitioner-A1 in the departmental proceedings would have any impact over the criminal proceedings initiated against him are matters to be considered by the trial Court, wherein the trial is in progress. Apart from the fact the petitioner-A1 has not chosen to question the criminal proceedings initiated against him all these years and that A1 participated in the trial being conducted, the fact remains that specific allegations are found in the charge sheet against the petitioner-A1, prima facie attracting the ingredients of the alleged offence. The truth or otherwise of the said allegations has to be necessarily ascertained by the trial Court on evidence that is being adduced during the course of trial. It is therefore held that there are absolutely no valid or justifiable grounds to quash further proceedings against the petitioner-A1, that too at this stage when the trial is in progress. 8. In the result, Criminal Petition is dismissed. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 26th July, 2011 Tsy [1] (1996) 9 SCC PAGE 1