ORDER:

The present criminal petition is filed seeking to call for the records pertaining to FIR No.95 of 2018 dated 14.10.2018 of Jarugumalli Police Station, Prakasham District, and to quash the same.

2. The 2nd respondent-Branch Manager, has lodged a report to the Jarugumilli Police, Prakasham District, alleging that, as per the policy of the Bank, annual re-appraisal of gold pledged in the Branch shall be conducted. Accordingly, re-appraisal of all the pledged gold was conducted in our Branch and found that 64 Gold packets amounting to approximately Rs.59,70,934.13/- were found to be fake. Upon enquiry on the matter, the jewel appraiser had admitted in writing that he has committed the fraud by certifying the fake gold articles as genuine and further pledged the fake gold ornaments in the name of his acquaintances.

3. Basing upon the said report, the police registered the crime against the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short I.P.C.). Assailing the said FIR, the present criminal petition is filed by the petitioner/accused.

4. The FIR discloses the cognizable offence against the petitioner/accused and as per the report lodged by the 2nd respondent/complainant, the petitioner/accused has admitted that he has committed wrong.

5. The Apex Court, after considering the plethora of citations, has laid the guidelines for quashing the FIR/complaints, in the case of Neeharika Infrastructure Private Limited v. State of Maharastra1 . Following the said judgment and reiterating the same guidelines, the Hon’ble Apex Court has passed an order in the case of State vs. M.Maridoss and another2 and the guidelines at paras 13.5 and 13.15 and at para 11, which reads thus:

“13.5. While examining an FIR/complaint, quashing of which is sought, the Court cannot embark upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR/complaint”.

“13.15. When a prayer for quashing the FIR is made by the alleged accused, the Court when it exercises the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., only has to consider whether or not the allegations in the FIR disclose the commission of a cognizable offence and is not required to consider on merits whether the allegations make out a cognizable offence or not and the Court has to permit the investigating agency/police to investigate the

allegations in the FIR.” 1 2021 SCC online SC 315

2 (2023) 4 SCC 338

“11. As per the settled position of law, it is the right conferred upon the investigating agency to conduct the investigation and reasonable time should be given to the investigating agency to conduct the investigation unless it is found that the allegations in the FIR do not disclose any cognizable offence at all or the complaint is barred by any law.”

6. In the present case, there is a specific allegation against the petitioner/accused with regard to commission of offences mentioned in the FIR. When there is a specific allegation against the petitioner/accused for cognizable offence, this Court at the FIR stage cannot interfere or interdict the police from investigating the case.

7. In view of the judgments of the Apex Court referred supra, the police are directed to follow the procedure prescribed under Section 41- A of the Cr.P.C and also the guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar3.

8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. However, the petitioner/accused is directed to co-operate with the investigating officer.

Police are also directed to file the charge sheet as early as possible.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.

__________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date:23.04.2024 KBN

3 (2014) 8 SCC 273

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHARA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.1396 OF 2019 Date:23-04-2024

KBN