Judgment ( 1 ) BAL Krishan Puri (accused) has filed this misc. petition u/s. 482, Cr. P. C. for quashing the proceedings pending against him and others, in the Court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Udaipur. ( 2 ) MR. Singh, pointing out that the offence had taken place some 18 years back and challan was filed 4 years after the registration of the case prays that the proceedings pending against the petitioner should be quashed. His contention is that the witnesses may not be available now and it will be abuse of the process of the Court to allow the continuance of the proceedings against the petitioner. He relies on the case of Des Raj Singal v. State of Punjab (1986) 89 (1) Punj LR 82. ( 3 ) THE learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the petition stating that there are serious charges of misconduct against the petitioner. Relying on the case of A. R. Antulay v. R. S. Nayak, (1992) 1 SCC 225 : (1992 Cri LJ 2717) he canvasses that the petition be dismissed. ( 4 ) I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. The allegations against the petitioner are that during the period 16-4-81 to 31-5-81 he was Land Conservation Officer and he and his two subordinates, by making false entries in the muster rolls, syphoned a sum of Rs. 90373/ -. The case was registered on the report of Sukhdev Kumar, the then Dy. Director (Vig. ). Forest Department, Rajasthan. After the completion of the investigation in which, as many as 33 witnesses were interrogated, the police submitted a challan on 23-7-85. The accused persons were summoned by the Court. After all the accused appeared this misc. petition was filed. ( 5 ) THE only question to be considered is whether on the ground that the incident is of the year 1981, the proceedings against the petitioner should be quashed. The case against the petitioner is not of minor nature. There are serious allegations against him that he and his two subordinates having conspired embezzled a sum of Rs. 90373/- by making false entries in the muster-rolls. The Apex Court in the case of A. R. Antulay v. R. S. Nayak (supra) has considered about the consequence which flows from an infringement of speedy trial. There are serious allegations against him that he and his two subordinates having conspired embezzled a sum of Rs. 90373/- by making false entries in the muster-rolls. The Apex Court in the case of A. R. Antulay v. R. S. Nayak (supra) has considered about the consequence which flows from an infringement of speedy trial. It has been observed that the Court may not quash the proceedings on the ground of delay in the cases of economic offences and those relating to public servants. ( 6 ) IN the instant case, the delay in the trial, as a matter of fact, is attributable to the petitioner himself who filed this petition in 1989. The ground that the police took some 4 years in investigating the matter does not give a right to the petitioner to get the proceedings quashed, moreso when the number of the witnesses interrogated by the police was not small. ( 7 ) IN view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of A. R. Antulay (supra) the petitioner cannot derive any benefit from the case relied on by Mr. Singh. ( 8 ) THERE being no merit in this petition, it is hereby dismissed. Petition dismissed.