JUDGMENT - D.G. DESHPANDE, J.:---Heard Mr. Khandeparkar for the petitioner and Ms. Kantharia for the State. 2. The petition is filed for quashing the proceedings initiated by the State against the petitioner for misappropriation of an amount of Rs. 2,159.66 paise on the ground that the proceedings are violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Mr. Khandeparkar pointed out that the so called misappropriation was allegedly committed by the petitioner between July, 1980 to June 1982 while the petitioner was acting as a Group Secretary of Sridevi Satheri Prasadic Vikas Co-operative Society. He also pointed out that the petitioner had, as per the charge sheet itself deposited the amount within a very short time but for the offences allegedly committed in 1980-82 the complaint was lodged by the auditor in 1987, charge sheet was filed in 1991 and charge was framed in 1993 but till this date not a single prosecution witness is examined. 3. When the matter was previously heard, Mr. Kandeparkar was asked to produce copy of the charge framed by the Magistrate. Accordingly, he has produced fax copy of the charge sheet (received by fax), the same is taken on record. As per this copy the accused-petitioner is charged for committing misappropriation of an amount of Rs. 2,159.66 paise in 1980-82. It was therefore contended by Mr. Khandeparkar that considering the judgment of this Court reported in 1991(4) Bom.C.R. 414 (R. Mahadevan Iyer v. State of Maharashtra another)1, the accused was entitled to have the proceedings quashed on the ground of delay. 4. I have gone through the copy of the charge produced by Mr. Khandeparkar and it supports his contention that the charge is in respect of Rs. 2,1,59.66 paise committed between July 1980 to June 1982. The learned A.P.P. is not in a position to refute the contentions of Mr. Kandeparkar that the F.I.R. was filed in 1987, charge sheet was filed in 1991, charge was framed in 1993 and that till today no witnesses for the prosecution is examined. She also could not contradict Mr. Khandeparkar regarding the payment of the aforesaid amount by the petitioner long back at the time of the audit as per the charge sheet itself. Therefore, considering all these facts and considering the aforesaid Judgment of this Court, the proceedings are required to be quashed. Hence, the order : ORDER Petition allowed. Rule made absolute. Khandeparkar regarding the payment of the aforesaid amount by the petitioner long back at the time of the audit as per the charge sheet itself. Therefore, considering all these facts and considering the aforesaid Judgment of this Court, the proceedings are required to be quashed. Hence, the order : ORDER Petition allowed. Rule made absolute. Proceedings against the petitioner pending before the J.M.F.C., Vengurla in Regular Criminal Case No. 7 of 1991 are quashed and set aside. Petition dismissed. *****