JUDGMENT 1. - The petitioner have filed this Criminal Misc. Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer for quashing of F.I.R. No. 265/2000 dated 17.12.2000 lodged at Police Station, Charbhuja, District Rajsamand and for quashing of the trial pending against them before the Judicial Magistrate, Kumbhalgarh in Cr. Case No. 141/2013 (Old No. 7/2012), State of Rajasthan 7s, Ram Lal & Ors. 2. In the alternative, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the criminal proceeding pending against them in connection with F.I.R. No. 387/2001 dated 31.10.2001 filed by Anti Corruption Department, Jaipur and the proceedings in connection with the said F.I.R. pending before the learned Special Judge, A.C.D. Cases, Udaipur. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners has contended that in connection with the incidents for which the F.I.R. No. 265/2000 was lodged against the petitioners at Police Station, Charbhuja, the police after investigation, filed charge-sheet against the petitioner, the Judicial Magistrate, Kumbhalgarh thereafter took cognizance and framed charges against them and the matter is pending trial. However, during the pendency of the trial, the Anti Corruption Department has lodged F.I.R. No. 387/2001 against the petitioner in connection with the same incidents and after concluding the investigation, is going to file charge-sheet against the petitioners and certain other persons in the Court of Special Judge A.C.D. Cases, Udaipur. It is, therefore, argued by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that for the same incidents, two Agencies of the State Government have launched parallel proceedings against the petitioners and the said action of the State Government is illegal, therefore, the proceedings pending against the petitioners in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Kumbhalgarh in connection with F.I.R. No. 265/2000 may be quashed. 4. In the alternative, the learned Counsel for the petitioners has argued that since the petitioners are facing trial for various incidents in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Kumbhalgarh and now the Anti Corruption Department is going to file charge-sheet against them in relation to the same incidents, the F.I.R. No. 387/2001 dated 31.10.2001 lodged by the Anti Corruption Department, Jaipur and the proceedings in connection thereof may be quashed. 5. 5. The learned Counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Babubhai v. State of Gujarat & Anr., (2010) 12 SCC 254 and prayed that in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above cited case, this petition may kindly be allowed and the relief prayed for in this petition may kindly be granted. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor has argued that the Anti Corruption Department has investigated in connection with all development works took place during the period when the petitioners were holding their respective posts, therefore, the said investigation is altogether different from the matters pending trial in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Kumbhalgarh, wherein the trial is pending against the petitioners in relation to some development works only. It is further contended that the Anti Corruption department has conducted investigation in relation to all development works took place during the period running from 1994-1995 to 1999-2000 and therefore, the said investigation is altogether different and in such circumstances, the relief as prayed for cannot be granted to the petitioners. 7. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the Public Prosecutor and perused the material placed on record. 8. The petitioners who were holding their respective posts during the period from 1994-1995 to 1999-2000 have been charged for committing various irregularities in connection with the construction works took place at Gram Panchayat, Janawad. In the F.I.R. No. 265/2000, it is alleged that certain development works have not even been carried out but the petitioners have prepared forged documents showing the construction of said development works and received the payment against the same. The police, after investigation, has filed the charge-sheet against the petitioners and the Trial Court thereafter took cognizance and framed the charges against the petitioners and the matter is pending trial in the Court. However, the Anti Corruption Department has investigated into the complaint in respect of all development works took place at Gram Panchayat, Janawad during the period from 1994-1995 to 1999-2000 and found that out of 141 development works, in 125 works, the petitioners along with several other persons have embezzled and amount off Rs. 67,48,516/-. 9. However, the Anti Corruption Department has investigated into the complaint in respect of all development works took place at Gram Panchayat, Janawad during the period from 1994-1995 to 1999-2000 and found that out of 141 development works, in 125 works, the petitioners along with several other persons have embezzled and amount off Rs. 67,48,516/-. 9. From bare perusal of the F.I.R. lodged by the Anti Corruption Department, it is clear that the Anti corruption Department has investigated in connection with all development works and not in connection with particular development works of Gram Panchayat, Janawad. In such circumstances, it cannot be said that the investigation conducted by the Anti Corruption Department is also in relation I to the same incidents for which the petitioners are facing trial. 10. The Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in Babubhai's case (supra) on which the reliance has been placed by the learned Counsel for the petitioners, is of no help to the petitioners, because the F.I.Rs. lodged against the petitioners, one by the Police and other by the Anti Corruption Department, I are not in relation to the same incidents and are pertaining to different incidents. 11. Hence, there is no force in this Criminal Misc. Petition and the same is, hereby dismissed.Stay petition also stands dismissed.Petition dismissed. *******