ORDER V. Gopala Gowda, J.—The Petitioner is the Director of Sangam Co-operative Sugar Factory at Belgaum. A criminal case has been registered against him under Annexure-F in Cr. No. 191 of 2000 under Sections 409, 419 and 477-A Indian Penal Code on the allegation of misappropriation of amounts. Petitioner is seeking to quash the same and to direct Respondents 1 and 2 to conduct audit of accounts of 3rd Respondent, fix liability on the concerned persons responsible for the misappropriation and to take action against them under Sections 64 and 65 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act. 2. At the out-set it is to be stated that the Petitioner, instead of facing the criminal proceedings, has filed this writ petition with the aforementioned prayers. It is well established that High Court cannot interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the investigation of criminal case. Writ jurisdiction is not meant for quashing the criminal proceedings. After investigation is over and filing chargesheet, if the offence alleged against the Petitioner is not made out, he can ask for discharge as provided under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Hence the prayer to quash the criminal proceedings is rejected. 3. Refusal to grant permission under Section 111(2)(b) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act to prosecute the Petitioner for the statutory violation of the provisions of the Act will not bar the police to investigate into the matter in respect of the alleged offences under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code. The jurisdiction, the nature of offences and punishment under the provisions of the KCS Act and under the Indian Penal Code are entirely different from one another. The contention of Mr. Subhas B. Adi, learned Counsel for the Petitioner in this regard is rejected. 4. The learned Counsel on behalf of Respondent No. 3 Mr. Ravi B. Naik has rightly placed reliance upon the judgments of the Apex Court reported in State of Kerala Vs. V. Padmnabhan Nair, AIR 1999 SC 2405 & State of West Bengal Vs. Narayan K. Patodia, AIR 2000 SC 1405 in support of his contention that this Court cannot interfere with the investigation powers in exercise of its extraordinary and discretionary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to quash the Criminal proceedings in PSC No. 191 of 2000 on the file of JMFC, Sankeshwar, Hukkeri Taluk. 5. Narayan K. Patodia, AIR 2000 SC 1405 in support of his contention that this Court cannot interfere with the investigation powers in exercise of its extraordinary and discretionary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to quash the Criminal proceedings in PSC No. 191 of 2000 on the file of JMFC, Sankeshwar, Hukkeri Taluk. 5. So far as the prayer to direct Respondents 1 and 2 to conduct audit of accounts of 3rd Respondent is concerned, it is stated that audit is pending. It is open to the 2nd Respondent to conclude the same as early as possible. 6. Writ Petition is dismissed with the above observation and the Petitioner is also at liberty either to ask for discharge from the Criminal case or ask for quashing the chargesheet as provided under the Code of Criminal Procedure, after filing the chargesheet if law permits for the same.