JUDGMENT : ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY, J. 1. Heard Mr. Mahesh Tewari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 2. Heard Mr. Rohit Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party-Central Bureau of Investigation. 3. This petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- “for quashing of the entire criminal prosecution/proceeding being R.C. Case No. 2(A)/2017-D including the order dated 14.05.2018 passed in the present case by the learned Special Judge CBI-cum-Additional District Judge-XIth at Dhanbad, wherein cognizance of the offence under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and section 13(2) read with section 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 has been taken as against the present petitioner in connection with R.C. Case No. 2(A)/2017-D, presently pending in the court of the learned Sri. Arvind Kumar Pandey, Special Judge CBI-cum-Additional Sessions Judge-XIth at Dhanbad.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner by referring to the charge-sheet at internal page-36 submits that the only allegation against the petitioner is that during the period 18.07.2016 to 15.08.2016, when the petitioner was given the additional charge of superintendent of post, Postal Division, Giridih, he had illegally issued five memos dated 29.07.2016 and 08.08.2016, whereby approval for engagement of substitutes in Giridih Postal Division, on the basis of memos fraudulently prepared and submitted by the co-accused Shri Uday Kumar, was given and thereby cheated the department of post and caused wrongful loss to the tune of Rs. 9,23,578/- and wrongful gain to themselves. The learned counsel submits that if there is any illegal act, the same was committed by Shri Uday Kumar and there is neither any criminal intent nor any material to link the petitioner to the alleged offence. The learned counsel submits that in this view of the matter, the entire criminal proceeding against the petitioner is an abuse of process of law and accordingly, the impugned order taking cognizance as well as the entire criminal proceeding, so far it relates to the petitioner is fit to be set-aside. 5. The learned counsel for the opposite party, on the other hand, opposes the prayer and submits that the allegation which has been levelled against the petitioner is further clarified by virtue of the material collected during investigation as referred to in page-34 of the charge-sheet. 5. The learned counsel for the opposite party, on the other hand, opposes the prayer and submits that the allegation which has been levelled against the petitioner is further clarified by virtue of the material collected during investigation as referred to in page-34 of the charge-sheet. He submits that there is enough material for proceeding against the petitioner and more than prima-facie case is made out against the petitioner. He also submits that the prosecution sanction has already been received for prosecuting the petitioner. 6. After hearing the counsel for the parties, as per charge-sheet inter-alia, following allegation has been levelled against the petitioner:- “(IX) Pirtand S.O. “Investigation revealed that approval for engagement of substitute Shri Nirmal Mahato in place of Shri Mahadeo Saw, GDS MD, Pirtand SO was obtained by Shri Uday Kumar from Shri Satya Narayan Singh for the period 17.02.2016 to 30.06.2016 on 29.07.2016. Shri Uday Kumar had prepared and issued false and back dated Memos dated 14.07.2016 and 28.07.2016, without obtaining the relevant and essential document related to risk and responsibility of regular incumbent and Charge Report between regular incumbent and substitute and the same were received in divisional office Giridih on 29.07.2016 in a bunch. CHARGE (1) That Shri Satya Narayan Singh, the then Superintendent of Post, Postal Division Hazaribagh while holding additional charge of the Supdt. of Post, Postal Division Giridih during the period 18.07.2016 to 15.08.2016 was responsible for ensuring adherence to laid down procedure/circulars in the matter of engagement of substitutes in postal division, Giridh and compliance to the relevant guidelines in this regard. Shri Staya Narayan Singh conspired with Shri Uday Kumar, the then Sub Divisional Inspector, Giridh West Postal, Sub-Division and other co-accused persons, and abused his official position and committed criminal misconduct by issueing 05 Memos dated 29.07.2016 and 08.08.2016 whereby approval for engagement of substitutes in Giridih Postal Division on the basis of Memos fraudulently prepared and submitted by co accused Shri Uday Kumar was given and thereby cheated the department of post and caused wrongful loss to the tune of Rs. 9,23,578/- and wrongful gain to themselves.” 7. Considering the aforesaid direct allegations made against the petitioner, this Court is of the considered view that prima-facie case for the alleged offence has been made out against the petitioner. Prosecution sanction has already been received. 9,23,578/- and wrongful gain to themselves.” 7. Considering the aforesaid direct allegations made against the petitioner, this Court is of the considered view that prima-facie case for the alleged offence has been made out against the petitioner. Prosecution sanction has already been received. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to exercise power under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the entire criminal proceeding against the petitioner, and this Court is of the considered view that there is enough material collected during investigation against the petitioner. 8. However, it will be open to the petitioner to raise all the points which have been raised in this petition as well as any other point that may be available to the petitioner before the learned court below at appropriate stage in accordance with law. 9. Accordingly, this petition is hereby dismissed. 10. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. 11. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, are also dismissed as not pressed. 12. Let this order be communicated to the learned court below through ‘FAX’.