1 2025:CGHC:30055-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1106 of 2021 Kheleshwar Sinha S/o Late Shri Punuram Sinha Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Nayapara Khurd, Police Station- Pithora, Tahsil- Pithora, District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station, Pithora, District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 2 Prakash Bibe Working As Nodal Officer, District Cooperative Central Bank Limited, Mahasamund Branch, District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shikhar Sharma Advocate For Respondent No. 1/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, P.L. For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Sandeep Dubey, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.07.04 10:18:07 +0530 2 Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 03/07/2025 1. The instant CRMP has been filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C with the following prayer:- “It is therefore prayed that, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned first information report bearing Crime No. 308/2014, final report no. 140/2015 and supplementary final report no. 140-A/2015-2019 filed by Station House Officer, Police Station, Pithora, District-Mahasamund (C.G.) (ANNEXURE P/1) before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pithora, District-Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 420, 409, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 34 of Indian Penal Code, so far as relates to the petitioner and entire criminal proceedings initiated against the present petitioner in Criminal Case No. 376/2015 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pithora, District-Mahasamund (C.G.), in the interest of justice.” 2. Facts of the case in brief is that the respondent no. 2, lodged report at Police Station, Pithora, alleging therein that during the period of 2009-2010 certain cheques which were cancelled were 3 used and an amount of Rs.1,00,48,000/- was embezzled and the amount was withdrawn in the name of different farmers. Subsequently, a report having been made, the fact was enquired and it was found that some of the farmers though were dead, in their name amount was withdrawn in connivance with the Bank Officer. After investigation offence was registered against 9 accused along with the present petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that at the time of incident the petitioner was working as Cashier and according to the guidelines prevailing in the District Cooperative Central Bank limited, and the cheque before withdrawal were presented before the Branch Manager, who cleared the cheque. He further submit that no evidence has been found against the petitioner to show involvement in commission of the embezzlement and further none of the witnesses have made any allegation against the petitioner. Therefore, he prays for quashment of the FIR, charge-sheet and and further proceedings. 4. Per Contra, learned State counsel and learned counsel for respondent No. 2 opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. They would submit that the offence relates to cheating and embezzlement of huge amount of money. However, they would submit that in the case in hand, the charge- sheet has already been filed before the concerned competent court and 6 witnesses have been examined and hence, FIR 4 cannot be quashed at this juncture. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 6. Prima-facie, this Court found that the petitioner has come up before this Court for quashment of FIR and further proceedings which was registered by the complainant/respondent No.2. From bare perusal of the pleadings and the documents, it is evident that the matter relates to cheating and embezzlement of huge amount of money. 7. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties; the allegations that the petitioner is involved in cheating and embezzlement of huge amount of money and the amounts were withdrawn in the name of the persons who were already died; and the fact that charge-sheet has already been filed and 6 witnesses have already been examined, as such, this Court does not find any good ground to quash the FIR and further proceedings at this stage as it will prejudice the trial . However, it is obligatory that the trial be brought to a logical end expeditiously. 8. In that view of the matter, the CRMP is dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Jyoti/ $ Bhilwar