Both these revision petitions under section 482 CrPC are directed against the filing of charge sheet against the accused petitioners, which has been registered as Special Case No.4 of 1997 against the accused petitioners along with five others. The case relates to LOC scam in the State. 2. Petitioners counsel placing reliance on the following judgments (I) (1989) 4 SCC 59 , (II) (1988) 1 SCC 692 , (III) (1996) 4 SCC 659 streneously urged that no case is made out against the accused petitioners, hence the proceedings must be quashed. Mr. Das, learned counsel for the CBI on the otherhand submitted that in view of the allegations made and material placed on record, there is more than sufficient evidence for framing of charge, and the petitions be dismissed as devoid of any merit. 3. Case law apart, as it turns on facts of each case, let us see the allegations made against the accused. Accused Keshab Chandra Deka and Pradip Rajbangshi, were serving as Treasury Accountant and Senior Account Assistant, respectively in Mangaldoi Treasury at the material time, similarly accused Bhupendra Kumar Deka was working as and LDA In the District Veterinary Office at Mangaldoi, at the relevant time. 4. The allegations made against each one of them is reproduced below : It is alleged in the FIR mat Dr. Cheni Ram Chutia, the then District Veterinary Officer, Mangaldoi, entered into a criminal conspiracy during October, 1992 at Mangaldoi with then Treasury Officer, Storekeeper and the Accountant of his office and others for the purpose of cheating the Govt of Assam and in furtherance of the said criminal conspiracy, he procured false LOC, false sanction order and false veterinary medicine bills, prepared false RCC Bills/Treasury Vouchers and dishonestly induced the Govt of Assam to deliver them Rs.7,14,200/- on the basis of said false documents and they thereby misused their official position as such public servants to, obtain undue pecuniary advantage for themselves and for others. 5. Investigation has disclosed that in furtherance of the said criminal conspiracy, the aforesaid officials dishonestly managed 2 false medicine bills of same day, i.e. 8.10.92 of a fictitious firm, M/s Drug Sea, Kedar Road, Guwahati. 6. Sh E. Talukdar has written as passed for payment on these 2 bills knowing the fact that no medicine was received in the store against these 2 bills. 6. Sh E. Talukdar has written as passed for payment on these 2 bills knowing the fact that no medicine was received in the store against these 2 bills. Both supplier bills are of one and the same^ate i.e. 8.10.92 but in the receipt column it has been shown that these 2 bills are received in the DVO Office 7 days earlier i.e. 1.10.92. 7. Investigation has disclosed that Bhupendra Deka made false entries in the store book regarding receipt of medicine in store against the aforesaid 2 bills although he had not received any medicine and dishonestly falsified the stock book by making false entries therein, which is the store book of his employer i.e. Veterinary Department. 8. Investigation has disclosed that the said RCC Bill, was sent to Treasury Officer, Mangaldoi, where it was dealt with by Pradeep Rajbonshi, Senior Accountant Assistant and Keshab Chandra Deka, Assistant and Siba Prasad Sarma, Treasury Dfficer. They proceesed it without having genuine" LOG because the LOC of Rs. 5,97,350/- does not bear the signature of Senior Financial Advisor and if the. LOC is not signed by the Senior Financial Advisor, no payment should have been made on its. Both supplier bills are of same date 8.10.92 and split up bills should lot have been accepted. They had already utilised the LOC of Rs. 1,17,000/- in the same month, October, 1992, while they again used the false LOC of Rs.5,97,350/- without making any verification. 9. Thus the aforesaid person cheated the Govt of Assam to the tune of Rs.5,97,200/- through Veterinary Department on basis of false LOC, sanction order, supplier bill and they thereby misused their official position as such public servants to obtain undue pecuniary advantage for themselves or others. 10. The aforesaid facts revealed the commission of offences of criminal conspiracy, cheating, use. of forged documents as genuine, i.e. supplier bill, sanction order and LOC, falsification of stock book, cash book and despatch register and criminal misconduct punishable under section 120B, 420,467 read with 471 and 477A IPC and 13 (2) read with 13 (1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. 11. The sanction orders for prosecution of aforesaid 7 persons have been obtained. 12. 11. The sanction orders for prosecution of aforesaid 7 persons have been obtained. 12. No amount of case law as cited by petitioners counsel, in face of the above factual allegations supported by documents and statements (any discussion of which is purposefully avoided at this stage lest it may prejudice the accused), can retrieve the situation in helping the accused to wriggle out the charges made against them. 13. Reference to authorities and cases, would be nothing short of an idle parade of familiar learning. The object of section 482 is to prevent abuse of the process of the Court, and in face of the allegations it cannot by any imagination be said that the case at hand is an abuse of the process of the Court. The petitions are wholly ill conceived, they are accordingly dismissed.