IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD DATED: THIS the 29th day of April, 2011. PRESENT: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR CRL.P.No. 2670 of 2011 Between: N.Rama Satyanarayana ..Petitioner and The State and another Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR CRL.P.No. 2670 of 2011 O r d e r: Heard the petitioner’s counsel and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. The petitioner herein is shown as one of the accused i.e., A-9 in Cr.No. 544 of 2009 of Satyanarayanapuram Police Station, Vijayawada and the said case is registered for the offences punishable under section 420 IPC and Ss. 3, 4 and 5 of A.P. Protection of Depositors, Financial Establishment Act, 1999. The petitioner has filed this petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the said FIR. 3. The matter was adjourned twice and the learned Public Prosecutor has produced today the statements of some of the witnesses. The statements of the witnesses viz., Nanduri Lakshmi Durgamba and Vadavalli Vijaya Madhavi read that this petitioner was also associated with the Sri Vasudha Cooperative Society. They have specifically stated that this petitioner was also associated with the said society, that for some time he was also its Chairman and believing his words they have deposited the amounts and the society ultimately duped them without returning the deposits. The allegations in the FIR do disclose the offences against this petitioner also and hence they have to be decided by the investigating agency and it cannot be said that this is a fit case for interference under section 482 Cr.P.C. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner however bought to my notice that the petitioner himself has invested Rs.10.00 Lakhs in all in his name and Rs.15.00 Lakhs in the name of his wife in the above society in the form of fixed deposits and that he too lost the said amounts and therefore cannot be held responsible for any offence. It is also stated by the petitioner that he submitted an application to the Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada disclosing his innocence and the same was referred to the Investigating Officer. 5. Having regard to the statements of the witnesses and also copies of certain invitation cards filed by the learned Public Prosecutor which would show that the petitioner was also associated with the above society. I am of the opinion that this is not a fit case for quashing the FIR and the investigation should go on, notwithstanding the fact that the petitioner himself has invested the money in the said society. 6. In the above circumstances, the petition is dismissed. _____________________ N. RAVI SHANKAR, J. April 29, 2011. *BVS THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR CRL.P.No. 2670 of 2011 29—04--2011