ORDER : Leave granted. 2. The matter is heard finally. 3. This appeal challenges order dated 31.08.2006 passed by the High Court in the petition which was filed by the appellant herein under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). By means of the said petition, the appellant had sought quashing of the entire proceedings in criminal case against him relating to the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 409, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) as well as the summoning orders passed by the trial Court in the said case. The High Court has dismissed the petition on the ground that the allegation against the appellant and other co-accused person is that they had pocketed money to the tune of Rs.2,85,600/- which was meant to be utilised for construction of 56 toilets in the village and the amount had to be deposited in the bank account of each beneficiary. However, instead of depositing the said amount, both the accused persons withdrew the same, being the Drawing Officer, and had grabbed the money with active cooperation and connivance of the Village Pradhan. Keeping in view this allegation against the appellant and co-accused, the High Court has deemed it fit to dismiss the petition. 4. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the order of the High Court is cryptic. Though it records the allegations contained in the chargesheet, as pointed out above, the grounds on which the quashing was sought have neither been taken note of nor dealt with by the High Court. The counsel for the appellant is right in his submission as we do not find any discussion in this behalf. However, instead of remitting the case to the High Court, since both the parties wanted this Court to take a view on the merits, we have heard the counsel for the parties on the merits of the case as well. 5. The appellant was working as Village Development Officer and co-accused was Panchayat Development Officer. The Government had floated Swajal Project, Tehri Garhwal and under the said project, after construction of 56 toilets at Gram Panchayat Lawa, cheques worth Rs.2,85,600/-, were issued to be given to the beneficiaries. 5. The appellant was working as Village Development Officer and co-accused was Panchayat Development Officer. The Government had floated Swajal Project, Tehri Garhwal and under the said project, after construction of 56 toilets at Gram Panchayat Lawa, cheques worth Rs.2,85,600/-, were issued to be given to the beneficiaries. As is clear from the narration given above, allegation against the appellant is that he along with the co-accused pocketed the said money and did not disburse the same to the beneficiaries. 6. The case set up by the appellant was that the amount which was to be disbursed to the beneficiaries was handed over by him to the Ex-Pradhan Kunwar Singh Aswal for distribution in presence of one witness. It is further submitted that the said Ex-Pradhan has admitted that he had received the entire amount from the appellant. In support of this submission, learned counsel for the appellant has drawn our attention to the relevant documents. He has also referred to the chargesheet which has been filed by the police. As per the said chargesheet as well, the handing over of the amount by the appellant to the Ex-Pradhan has been admitted. It could not be disputed by the learned counsel for the respondent-State that insofar as the appellant is concerned, in his capacity as Village Development Officer, he was to hand over the said amount to the Pradhan and thereafter, the Pradhan was to distribute the same to the beneficiaries. Thus, insofar as the appellant is concerned, no unlawful act can be attributed on his part in the light of the admitted documents and even as per the chargesheet. Therefore, there was no reason to frame charge against the appellant or to pass summoning order against the appellant. 7. We find force in the submission made by the counsel for the appellant. As a result, present appeal is allowed and the proceedings arising out of the aforesaid chargesheet against the appellant as well as the summoning orders passed by the trial Court are hereby quashed.