1 2025:CGHC:32166-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2161 of 2025 Dr. Rajesh Degan S/o Dr. J.K. Degan Aged About 65 Years (Insurance Medical Officer Class-1, Now Under Suspension), R/o D-09, Shailendra Nagar, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Rakhi, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Dr. Jayanti Singh W/o Shri Mukesh Kumar Singh Aged About 61 Years Presently Working As Insurance Medical Officer, Class-1, Directorate Employee State Insurance Services, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.), (Complainant) Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shikhar Sharma, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board SOURABH BHILWAR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2025.07.17 10:26:53 +0530 2 Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 11/07/2025 1. The instant CRMP has been filed with the following reliefs:- “It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition and kindly be pleased to quash the FIR dated 09-01-2025 registered as Crime No.05/2025 at Police Station Rakhi, District Raipur (C.G.) and also be pleased to quash the entire charge sheet filed by the police on dated 07-03-2025 under Section 409 of Indian Penal Code as well as the criminal proceeding bearing Criminal Case No.26687/2025 pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.), in the interest of justice.” 2. Facts of the case in brief are that the complainant/respondent No.2 made a written complaint to the Police Station Rakhi, District Raipur (C.G.) stating, inter alia, therein that two bank accounts of Employees State Insurance Services are in Bank of Baroda, Branch Vivekanand Nagar Raipur, bearing Bank Account No. 2426010004413 (ESI Test) and Bank Account No. 24260100012386 (ESI Exam) about which the enquiry was conducted as per the directions of Director Employees State Insurance Services (ESIS)-cum-Labour Secretary, Chhattisgarh State and the investigation committee in its report dated 08-01- 2025 found out that the petitioner who is posted as Insurance Medical Officer (First Class) has wrongfully withdrawn public exchequer from the said account of ESI Test on various dates, amounting to Rs.5,00,000/-, Rs.7,00,000/- and Rs.7,20,000/- and 3 in the reply filed by the petitioner, he accepted the unauthorized withdrawal of said amount, due to which the offence under Section 409 of IPC has been registered against the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the complainant has lodged the FIR on the basis of bald and vague allegations and the charge sheet has been filed against the petitioner is arbitrary, illegal and bad in the eyes of law. He submits that no such act has been committed by the petitioner, he has been roped in the present case by hatching conspiracy and misuse of power. Learned counsel further submits that an enquiry has been conducted by the enquiry committee constituted by the Directorate of Employees State Insurance Services and the said enquiry committee without following the principles of natural justice and without giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, submitted a report against the petitioner whereby it reflects that due to non-availability of proper documents, the expenses prior to 17/07/2019 cannot be certified and in spite of this finding, the enquiry proceeded and the petitioner has been held liable for the said irregularities. He further submits that there is no documentary evidence to prove the alleged embezzlement committed by the petitioner hence, the allegation as alleged in the charge-sheet against the petitioner is baseless. Thus, the charge- sheet may be quashed. 4 4. Per Contra, learned State counsel would oppose the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submit that the charges have been framed. He would submit that in the case in hand, the charge-sheet has already been filed before the concerned trial Court, therefore, at this stage, interference of this Court in the proceedings of the trial Court would hamper the trial and hence, FIR and the charge-sheet cannot be quashed at this juncture. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended with the petition. 6. Prima-facie, this Court found that there are serious allegations against the petitioner regarding misappropriation and embezzlement of public exchequer amounting to Rs. 19,00,000/- as the charge-sheet has been filed and there are allegations of misappropriation of funds committed by the petitioner while discharging his official duties. 7. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and particularly considering the fact that, the enquiry report (Annexure P/3) which has been relied upon by the petitioner may be a subject matter of a departmental enquiry but the same cannot said to be an evidence which can be taken into account during the course of trial. Hence at this stage, it is not proper for this Court to quash the FIR and the charge sheet against the petitioner as well as the criminal proceeding pending 5 before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur, therefore, this Court does not find any good ground to quash the FIR, charge sheet and the criminal proceeding against the petitioner. 8. In view of the above, the instant CRMP is rejected at the motion stage. Sd/ Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice S. Bhilwar/ Jyoti