1. These two separate petitions are filed by petitioner Virupakshappa Bommashetty under S.482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'Cr.P.C.'), to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him in C.C.No.33/2012 (Crime No.223/2009) and C.C.No.533/2015 (Crime No.125/20212) for the offences punishable U / S.408 and S.409 r/w/s 34 I.P.C. on the file of I Addl.Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Dharwad.

2. Since the petitioner is same and the allegations made against him are common, these two petitions are clubbed together and decided by a common order.

3. In support of his petition, petitioner has contended that the initiation of criminal proceedings against him is nothing but abuse of process of the Court and with the sole intention of harassing him. Therefore, it is a fit case to quash the further proceedings.
3.1 When the respondent police have already registered the case against one Nissar Ahamad Mujawar, question of entertaining one more complaint on the same allegations and filing additional charge sheet does not arise. There was no order passed by the Magistrate to conduct further investigation. The police authorities are trying to mislead the Court by filing additional charge sheet. On this ground alone, the issue of process against the petitioner is illegal and not sustainable in law.
3.2 The respondent police have failed to take note of the fact that it was the petitioner who on verification of records found the misappropriation committed by Nissar Ahamad Mujawar and immediately reported the matter to the society and based on it, audit was conducted and complaint came to be filed. Such being the case, filing additional charge sheet against petitioner is illegal. The material in the additional charge sheet does not constitute any offence. Without any application of mind, the trial Court has issued process and prays to quash the proceedings.

4. On the other hand learned High Court Government Pleader submitted oral objections to the effect that at the relevant point of time petitioner was working as Secretary and accused No.2 - Nissar Ahamad Mujawar was working as pigmy collector at Credit Cooperative Society by name Samagra Grameen Abhivridhi Pattina Sahakar Sangh, Uppinabetageri ('Society', for short). From 15.09.2009 accused No.2 - Nissar Ahamad Mujawar remained unauthorized absent. He had also taken away some of the documents with him.
4.1. After conducting internal audit, the president of the said society lodged a complaint dated 08.12.2009 alleging that for the period from 01.04.2008 to 13.09.2008, accused No.2 - Nissar Ahamad Mujawar has misappropriated Rs.3,56,650/-. Based on it, case was registered in Crime No.223/2009. After completing investigation, charge sheet came to be filed in C.C.No.33/2012 against him for the offences under S.409 Indian Penal Code. In the charge sheet Nissar Ahamad Mujawar is arraigned as accused No.1.
4.2. Learned High Court Government Pleader would further submit that regular audit was conducted by the Senior Auditor, Office of Asst. Director of Cooperative Societies. His report disclose that for the year 2008-09, in addition to accused No.2 - Nissar Ahamad Mujawar, the present petitioner is also responsible for the misappropriation. Accordingly additional charge sheet is filed, arraigning petitioner as accused No.1 and Nissar Ahamad Mujawar as accused No.2. 4.3. So far as Crl.P.102031/2017 is concerned, learned High Court Government Pleader would submit that Sales Officer No.1, in the Office of Asst. Director of Cooperative Societies has filed a complaint dated 13/28.07.2012 alleging that for the year 2008-09 and 2009-10 both petitioner and Nissar Ahamad Mujawar have misappropriated a total sum of Rs.3,79,730/- under different heads. Based on the said complaint, case was registered in Crime No.125/2012 and after completing the investigation, charge sheet is filed in C.C.No.533/2015 for the offences punishable under S.406 and S.409 r/w/s 34 Indian Penal Code against accused No.1 - Virupak