Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.

The petitioner herein seeks quashment of Criminal Case No.1425/2011 pending against him in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Korba for commission of offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 409 and 120B of the IPC.

2. The Branch Manager, Zila Sahakari Kendriya Bank, Barpali Branch on 17-9-2011 lodged a complaint in the concerned police station that a godown was sought to be constructed under the supervision of the petitioner as Assistant Engineer and the entry in the measurement book was to be made by the other co-accused B.P. Kashyap. It was further alleged in the complaint that the contractor co-accused Govind Kumar Agrawal was paid against the construction of godown a sum of Rs. 5,02,986/- out of which entries of a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- were fabricated, as on inspection by the Executive Engineer, the base concreting was not found up to the mark as per the technical specifications for construction of godown. On the basis of the said complaint, the first information report (FIR) was registered and investigation was carried out and after investigation, final report under Section 173 of the CrPC was filed against B.P. Kashyap, Govind Kumar Agrawal and the petitioner herein, but so far as the petitioner and Govind Kumar Agrawal are concerned, charge-sheet was filed in their abscondence. This petition for quashing of criminal case has been filed mainly on the ground that initiation and continuation of criminal prosecution against the petitioner is nothing but abuse of the process of the Court, as he has been roped in false and fabricated case since he has lodged complaint against the Chairman of the Zila Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit alleging corruption and the necessary ingredients for constituting the aforesaid offences are absolutely lacking in the charge-sheet so filed against him.

3. Ms. Seema Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that if the allegations made in the FIR which culminated into charge-sheet against the petitioner are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, they do not constitute any offence or make out a case against the petitioner, as such, the criminal proceeding initiated is manifestly attended with mala fide and with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance, as he has dared to lodge complaint against the Chairman of the Zila Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit and the Branch Manager of the Zila Sahakari Kendriya Bank, Barpali Branch is the first informant of the criminal case initiated against him. She would further submit that co- accused B.P. Kashyap Sub Engineer, who is the main culprit has already been acquitted by the order of the criminal Court Judicial Magistrate First Class, Korba in Criminal Case No.383/2014 (State of Chhattisgarh v. Badri Prasad Kashyap) on 31-1-2019 for want of evidence and the petitioner's case is identical to that and therefore he is entitled for same relief and he is also entitled for quashment of entire criminal proceeding.

4. Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the State/respondent, would oppose the submissions and would submit that on the basis of the material placed on the charge-sheet, prima facie evidence is available to connect the petitioner with the offence alleged against him and as such, the petitioner neither joined the investigation nor co-operated in the trial and even did not make himself available for interrogation and even after his application for anticipatory bail was rejected by this Court, he is the person who has neither participated in the investigation nor standing trial till now, therefore, he is not entitled to invoke the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the CrPC, as such, the petition deserves to be dismissed and he be asked to stand trial for above-stated case, as it is pending since 13-12-2011.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein-abo