OM PRAKASH BHARGAVA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Sec. 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing the FIR registered at Crime No.646/2013 under Sec. 409 of Indian Penal Code (in short "the Penal Code") at Police Station Padav, District Gwalior and also for quashing the criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No. 7590/2014 pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gwalior.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 7.12.2013 one Rakesh Kumar Gupta, present Executive Engineer has filed a complaint at Police Station against the petitioner and others alleging therein that vide letter No.2531 dated 27.12.2007 of General Manager, Madhya Pradesh Pashu Dhan Avam Kukut Vikas Nigam an amount of Rs.22,63,000.00 through Bank Draft dated 9.1.2008 has been received by the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department Division No.1 from which Shri O.P. Bhargava the then Executive Engineer had made the payment of Rs.20,14,000.00 under the head of A.R./S.R., and therefore, Shri O.P. Bhargava has committed grave irregularity in making the payment and in reference to the letter No.F 58/16/13/19/Yo/6606 Bhopal dated 4.12.2013 the works mentioned in the letter No.5494/S.A.C./12-13 dated 28.7.2012 which are ten in number, the above-said amount has been unauthorisedly spent and therefore, the enquiry about the truthfulness of spending the amount be conducted. On the basis of that complaint, the FIR has been registered against the petitioner and investigation was started. After completion of investigation the charge-sheet has been filed under section 409 of the Penal Code and the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate has taken cognizance against the petitioner under section 409 of the Penal Code.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that looking to the evidence available on record no offence under section 409 of the Penal Code is made out against the petitioner. It is submitted that during pendency of the case the investigation has been made on the amount spent on the 10 works mentioned and enquiry has also been conducted about the truthfulness and authenticity of the works mentioned in the bill and ultimately found that no irregularity has been committed. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that during investigation no evidence has been produced which proved that the petitioner has taken any commission for the aforesaid works. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that prosecution has submitted the work order and the bill and there was no mistake of petitioner has been seen that the work were done on higher rates. He further submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence under section 409 of the Penal Code. On these grounds, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for quashing the FIR registered against him and the consequential proceedings pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate in Criminal Case No.7590/2014.