JUDGMENT

A. K. PARICHHA, J. — This is an application under Sec. 482. Criminal Procedure Code (in short, ‘Cr.P.C.) for quashing the proceeding in Vigilance G.R.Case No. 7 of 2005, corresponding to Vigilance FIR No. 7 of 2005 pending in the Court of learned Special C.J.M., Vigilance, Bhubaneswar. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Cell, Bhubaneswar lodged an FIR alleging that the petitioner who is working as Company Secretary of Orissa Rural Housing Development Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar (in short, ‘ORHDC’) and the Managing Director of the said Corporation entered into a criminal conspiracy with a builder firm “M/s. Metro Builders Pvt. Limited” and in prosecution of that conspiracy sanctioned and disbursed a loan of Rs. 1.5 crores to that firm abusing their official position. Basing on the said FIR Bhubaneswar Vigilance P.S.Case No. 7 of 2005 was registered under Section 13 (2)(/13 (1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act read with Section 120-B of IPC and investigation was undertaken. Aggrieved by such registration of the case and investigation, the petitioner has filed the present application for declaring the registration of the case illegal and for quashing of the investi¬gation and the proceeding of the case.

2. Mr. Govind Das, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was working as Company Secretary of the O.R.H.D.S., Bhubaneswar and his official role was confirmed to the documentation part of the loan transactions and he was in no way concerned with the sanction or disbursement of the loan to M/s. Metro Builders Pvt. Ltd. and for that reason the case under Section 13 (2)/13(1)(d) of the P.C.Act and Section 120-B of the IPC is not maintainable against him. In this regard, Mr. Das indicated several clauses of the power of attorney, copy of the deed of the agreement, the legal heir certificate, copy of Khatian, copy of the additional agreement and copy of the Board of Resolution. According to him, when the loanee M/s. Metro Builders Pvt. Ltd. had executed the required documents and the title deeds of the property mortgaged had been deposited and valid power of attorney holder had offered collateral security, sanction and disbursement of the loan can never be termed as illegal or product of any criminal conspiracy. Mr. Das, specifically submitted that the allegations and materi¬als put forth by the Vigilance authorities do not constitute any case against the petitioner for the alleged offences and so quashing of the FIR and investigation in Bhubaneswar Vigilance P.S.Case No. 7 of 2005 is necessary.

3. Mr. D. Mohapatra, learned Standing Counsel (Vigilance) on the other hand submitted that ORHDC is constituted with the primary object of providing cost effective fire proof houses to the poor persons of rural areas and there was no scope for the said Corporation to grant hefty loans to the urban builders like M/s. Metro Builders Pvt. Ltd. He submitted that sanction and disbursement of loan of Rs. 1.5 Crores to M/s. Metro Builders Pvt. Ltd. itself suggests that the petitioner and the Managing Director of the Corporation were involved in criminal conspiracy with that firm. Mr. Mohapatra further submitted that the loanee M/s. Metro Builders Pvt. Ltd. was already a defaulter and had also not executed proper documents of mortgage, collateral secu¬rity etc., for the loan applied for but the petitioner recommend¬ed its application for the loan, as a result, the loan was sanc¬tioned and public funds were wasted. Mr. Mohapatra further sub¬mitted that there are clear allegations of official misconduct and criminal conspiracy against the petitioner in the FIR and investigation is going on into the said allegations and so at this juncture quashing of the FIR and investigation would amount to throttling the process of investigation and depriving the investigating agency from finding out truth or falsity of allega¬tions.

4. In the case of Rajesh Bajaj v. State NCT of Delhi and others, A