Surya Partap Singh, J.

1. This is petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, hereinafter being referred to as “BNSS” only. By virtue of this petition, the quashing of FIR No. 36 dated 31.05.2016, Police Station Jodhan, District Ludhiana (Rural) has been sought. The above-mentioned FIR has been lodged for the commission of offence punishable under Section 406 of ‘the Indian Penal Code, 1860’, hereinafter being referred to as “IPC” only.

2. It is relevant to mention here that this is third petition for quashing of above-mentioned FIR. As per petitioner the first petition for quashing of above-mentioned FIR, i.e. Criminal Misc. No. M-33859 of 2016 was disposed of by this court by observing that the petition was pre-mature. According to petitioner this court directed the respondents No.1 to 3 to take into consideration all the material facts, documents and the statement as mandated under Section 163(2) of ‘the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973’, hereinafter being referred to as “Cr.P.C.” only, before forming any opinion regarding culpability of the petitioner. According to petitioner a further direction was given to the Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana to constitute a ‘Special Investigating Team’ for fair investigation of the case.

3. With regard to second petition for quashing, it has been pleaded by the petitioner that the second petition, i.e. Criminal Misc. No. M-36799 of 2017 was permitted to be withdrawn by this court with liberty to the petitioner to file fresh petition with better particulars.

4. The present petition has been filed in the backdrop of the facts that the FIR in question came into being at the instance of ‘District Manager, Punjab State Warehousing Corporation, District Office, Ludhiana’, hereinafter being referred to as “complainant” only. It was reported by the above-named complainant that ‘the Punjab State Warehousing Corporation’, hereinafter being referred to as “PSWC” only, is a statutory organization and performs the function of procurement of food-grains including ‘Paddy’ on behalf of Government of India. According to complainant, as per milling policy of the government the ‘Paddy’ purchased by the ‘PSWC’ from the farmers used to be stored in the premises of the allotted rice mills for custom milling. As per complainant, by following the same policy an agreement dated 22.10.2009 was executed by the Miller, namely ‘M/s Mahadev Rice & General Mills’, Quila Raipur, District Ludhiana through its partners, namely ‘Gagandeep Jindal’ and ‘Amandeep’ on 22.10.2009.

5. The complainant further alleged that as per clause – 6 of the agreement the Miller was fully responsible for the safe custody of Paddy stocks entrusted to the Miller till the delivery of entire rice as per out-turn ratio fixed by the Government of India. It was also alleged by the complainant that as per Clause Nos. 12(a) & 12(b) of the agreement the Miller was liable for criminal action in case of misappropriation, theft etc. of the stocks. According to complainant 330735 bags in the packing of 35 Kgs. each of ‘Paddy’ were handed over to the above-mentioned Miller and stored in its premises, but later on a shortage in stock was detected and it was found that the Miller had misappropriated/stole a part of the stocked rice. It was further alleged by the complainant that instead of 13472.50 quintals, the weight of the stock was found to be 11726.158 quintals. Thus, showing the shortage of 1746.35 quintals.

6. It is the case of the prosecution that pursuant to above-mentioned complaint, an inquiry was conducted and thereafter, on the instructions of Senior Superintendent of Police, Ludhiana (Rural), the challan was filed and further investigation taken up.

7. Aggrieved of the above-mentioned FIR the present petition seeking for quashing of the same has been filed.

8. Heard.

9. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that instant case is the classic example, wherei