1 Cri.Appln.No.2064/2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2064/2006 1) Kondiba s/o Govindrao Davane Age: 35 Yrs., occu.Labourer, R/o Palasa, Tq. Hadgaon, District Nanded. 2) Vilas s/o Bhagorao Maske, Age: 38 Yrs., occu.Agril. R/o Palsa, Tq. Hadgaon, District Nanded. = APPLICANTS (orig.Accused Nos. 1 and 2) VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Officer, Mantha Police Station, Tq. Hadgaon, District Nanded. 2) Hanmant s/o Nagorao Sangnor, Age: 41 Yrs., occu. Service, Member Secretary District Level, Shivkalin Pani Sathawan Yojana, Aani Bhusarvekshan Vikas Yojana, Anand Nagar, Nanded, Tq. And district Nanded. and ors. = RESPONDENTS (Orig.Complainant) *** Mr.VD Godbharale, APP for State ----- CORAM : A.H.JOSHI & A.R.JOSHI,JJ. DATE : 18th October, 2011. ORAL JUDGMENT (PER :A.H.JOSHI,J.) 2 Cri.Appln.No.2064/2006 1) None for the applicants. 2) Perused the Petition. 3) FIR in crime No.35/2006, registered with Police Station, Manatha, District Nanded is sought to be quashed. 4) The complaint is a written letter by Senior Geologist, Geological Survey and Development Agency, Nanded. 5) The substance of the complaint is that – on 7th July, 2005 the petitioners have received the advance of Rs.1,09,175/- towards construction of cement weir, however, the work was not done only the amount was accounted for. 6) By way of grounds of challenge, the applicants have contended that the process of construction of the work in question is going on and the progress of the work is certified by the Supervising authority. 7) Whether the amount, so received under the scheme, was spent for the work for which it was allocated, was a matter to be explained by the accused after receiving the notice. The petition is totally silent on the point, also whether the notices were replied. 3 Cri.Appln.No.2064/2006 8) Moreover, the contentions are in the nature of defence. 9) In this background, if at all the applicants have some defence, they may put forward before the Investigating Officer. 10) In a petition seeking quashment of FIR, it would not be permissible for this court to accept the version of the applicants to be true and correct. 11) The defences which the applicants want to put-forth, can be put at every stage of investigation and in the event of charge sheet before the Court. In this background, no indulgence is required. 12) Rule discharged. Interim stay vacated. sd/- sd/- (A.R.JOSHI,J.) (A.H.JOSHI,J.) bdv/