JUDGMENT : Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. 1. Consequent upon the orders passed on the previous date, Mr. Vijay Sharma, Superintendent of Police (SB & ACB) (officiating) is present in person along with IO/Dy. S.P. Bhupender Bragata. Learned Additional Advocate General has also placed on record the status report. A perusal thereof reveals that the investigation is still in progress. 2. The allegations, as per the FIR, Annexure P-1, sought to be quashed, are that the accused-petitioner during his posting at Theog Branch of H.P. State Cooperative Bank Limited, allegedly committed serious irregularities in the matter of sanction of loan mostly to the people residents of near and around his native place under various schemes. He, therefore, has allegedly acted in prejudicial manner and suspected to have sanctioned the loans for some other consideration also. He thereby abused his official position. He has not only obtained loan in his own name, but also in the name of his son. He allegedly used his official position for personal gains. Most of the loans allegedly defaulted during his tenure as Manager of Theog Branch of the Bank were marked as NPAs intentionally to hide the same from the authorities. 3. it is well settled at this stage that the Court should be slow while quashing the criminal proceedings that too when at the initial stage of investigation. The principle to be followed while considering a prayer for quashing the FIR or consequential criminal proceedings have been settled by Hon’ble Apex Court in State of Haryana and Others vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and Others, AIR 1992 SC 604 , which reads as follows: “108. The principle to be followed while considering a prayer for quashing the FIR or consequential criminal proceedings have been settled by Hon’ble Apex Court in State of Haryana and Others vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and Others, AIR 1992 SC 604 , which reads as follows: “108. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kind of cases wherein such power should be exercised. 1. Where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. 2. Where the allegations in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156 (1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. 3. Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. 4. Where, the allegations in the F.I.R do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. 5. Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. 6. 5. Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. 6. Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding in instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. 7. Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala-fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” 4. On hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and also learned Additional Advocate General as well as going through the record, the FIR Annexure P-1 has been registered against the accused-petitioner on the basis of a complaint made by one M.R. Negi, District Manager, H.P. State Cooperative Bank Limited, Shimla. The investigation is still in progress. The record of this case has been perused. It is not deemed appropriate to elaborate the same as in that event prejudice is likely to be caused to the case of either side, however, suffice would it to say that in the nature of the allegations in the complaint and the investigation conducted not only the accused-petitioner but the investigating agency has also interrogated the other officers/officials, who remained posted in Theog Branch of the Bank. Therefore, it is not deemed appropriate to throttle down the investigation by quashing the FIR at this stage. The accused-petitioner, if innocent, may prove so by joining the investigation of the case. Since crores of rupees of the complainant-Bank are involved, therefore, allowing the investigation to continue would serve the ends of justice. Being so, no case for quashing the FIR at this stage is made out. This petition is accordingly dismissed. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.