RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. P.C. Tripathy, learned Sr. counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Pankaj Kumar, learned counsel for the State.
(2.) IN this application the petitioners have prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Balumath P.S Case no. 23 of 2007 corresponding to G.R. no. 180 of 2007 including the order dated 19.10.2013 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Latehar, whereby and whereunder cognizance has been taken for the offence punishable under sections 409, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.
(3.) THE prosecution story in short is that one Sri Prakash Ram lodged a case in the Balumath Police Station stating therein that under Balumath Block Irrigation Scheme in Besra (Pargarha) was entrusted to Junior Engineer Sri Diwakar Mishra (P.W. -2), Assistant Engineer Sri Prabha Shankar Dubey (P.W. -1) and Executive Engineer Sri Madan Prasad Singh who have wrongly measured the work done worth Rs. 1,17,000/ - when in course of inspection on 28.04.2007 it was found that only 10 -12 Chouki of soil has been cut. It was therefore alleged that the entire amount was embezzled by the accused persons leading to institution of Balumath P.S. case no. 23 of 2007. Investigation culminated in submission of charge -sheet pursuant to which the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Latehar was pleased to take cognizance vide order dated 19.10.2013 for the offence punishable under sections 409, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the entire allegations are false and concocted and in course of investigation it has come to light that the amount has not been embezzled by the petitioners. It has also been submitted that in fact the draft was prepared in the name of Dhaneshwar Oraon and Janeshwar Yadav who are beneficiaries of Rs. 97,833/ - but the same was never handed over to them. It has further been submitted that in fact departmental proceeding was initiated in which during course of enquiry it was found that although the Proforma for payment was prepared but no payment was made and accordingly the petitioners were exonerated. It has also been submitted by the learned senior counsel for the petitioners that the amount alleged to have been defalcated has already been returned and in such circumstances no ground exists for continuation of the criminal proceeding.;