ORDER : Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition seeking quashment of recovery proceeding dated 12.07.2011 as reflected in the service record of the petitioner filed as Annexure P/6. The petitioner is also aggrieved by withholding 10% of the pension and 60% of gratuity on account of the pendency of the Trial under the provision of the Prevention and Corruption Act (for the sake of the convenience ''PC Act''). The facts of the case in short are as under: 2. The petitioner was appointed on the post of Sub Engineer vide order dated 27.10.1975, thereafter he was regularized on the said post on 01.07.1989. From 01.05.1997 to 27.09.2003, the petitioner was posted on deputation at Indore Municipal Corporation in the capacity of Sub Engineer. Vide order dated 27.09.2003, the petitioner was repatriated to his parent department i.e. Water Resources Department. The petitioner attained the age of superannuation on 31.12.2011 and accordingly retired from the service. According to the petitioner, the Special Police Establishment (Lokayukt) registered an FIR on 17.01.2011 at Crime No.04/2011 under Section 13(1) E and 13 (2) of the PC Act on account of disproportionate assets accumulated in the form of moveable and immovable property worth of Rs.43-44 lacs against known source of income of Rs. 22 lacs. After completion of the investigation, the charge sheet was filed on 07.08.2013. In the exercise of power under Section 9(4) of M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 (in short '' Pension Rules'') the respondents have withheld 10% of the pension and 60 % gratuity, which is the main grievance of the petitioner by way of this Writ Petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge sheet was filed two years after the retirement from service on 31.12.2011, therefore at the time of retirement, no judicial proceedings were pending against him, thus pension and gratuity were wrongly withheld by respondents. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that under Rule 9 (6) (B) of Pension Rules, the judicial proceedings shall be deemed to be instituted in the case of criminal proceedings, on the date on which the complaint or report of a police officer, on which the Magistrate takes cognizance, is made, therefore at time of retirement no judicial proceedings were instituted against him, therefore provision of Rule 64 the M.P. Pension Rules will not apply. The petitioner is entitled to be released the entire pension and gratuity. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgments passed by the Single Bench as well as the Division Bench of this Court in cases Parmanand Vs. State of M.P. reported in 2004 (IV) MPLJ 201, Aditya Mishra Vs. State of M.P. reported in 2014 (II) MPLJ 59 , Ramlal Malviya Vs. State of M.P. reported in 2017 (IV) MPLJ 499 , Ramlal Malviya Vs. State of M.P. i.e. Writ Appeal No.243/2017 decided on 05.09.2017, State of M.P. Vs. Prahalad Amarchiya i.e. Writ Appeal No.153/2017 decided on 10.04.2017, Suresh Kumar Vs. State of M.P. reported in 2019 (II) MPLJ 178 , Sardar Jorasingh Vs. State of M.P. reported in 2019 SCC Online M.P. 881 and Gulab Chand Jangade Vs. State of M.P. reported in 2019 SCC Online M.P. 6819. 4. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents submits that recently the Coordinate Bench of this High Court in the case of Chandramani Vs. State of M.P. 2020 (4) M.P.L.J. 637 has decided as to what would be the correct date of institution of criminal proceedings under Rule 9 of the M.P. Pension Rules and held that the date of institution would be when the complaint or report to the Police Officer is made not the date when the Criminal Court takes cognizance. It is further submitted by the learned Government Advocate that as per Rule 9 (4) of the M.P. Pension Rules, in case of the Government servant who has retired on attaining the age of superannuation against whom any judicial proceedings are instituted or continued, the provision of Rule 64 the M.P. Pension Rules will apply meaning thereby in respect of Government servants refer to in sub-rule (4) of Rule 9 the Head of Office shall authorise the payment of provisional pension not exceeding the maximum pension and 50% of gratuity taking into consideration the gravity of charges, therefore, no interference is made on a decision taken by the respondent and Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record. 5. In this case, an FIR was registered against the petitioner on 17.01.2011, the petitioner retired from the services after attaining the age of superannuation on 31.12.2011, and thereafter charge sheet was filed on 07.08.2013. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record. 5. In this case, an FIR was registered against the petitioner on 17.01.2011, the petitioner retired from the services after attaining the age of superannuation on 31.12.2011, and thereafter charge sheet was filed on 07.08.2013. The trial against the petitioner has not been concluded till date. For ready reference Rules 9 (4) & (6) of the M.P. Pension Rules are reproduced below:- “9. Right of Governor to withhold or withdraw pension. The trial against the petitioner has not been concluded till date. For ready reference Rules 9 (4) & (6) of the M.P. Pension Rules are reproduced below:- “9. Right of Governor to withhold or withdraw pension. – (4) In the case of a Government servant who has retired on attaining the age of superannuation or otherwise and against whom any departmental or judicial proceedings are instituted or where departmental proceedings are continued under subrule (2), a provisional pension and death-cum-retirement gratuity as provided in [Rule 64], as the case may be, shall be sanctioned : [Provided that where pension has already been finally sanctioned to a Government servant prior to institution of departmental proceedings, the Governor may, by order in writing, withhold, with effect from the date of institution of such departmental proceedings fifty per cent of the pension so sanctioned subject however that the pension payable after such withholding is not reduced to less than [the minimum pension as determined by the Government from time to time] :Provided further that where departmental proceedings have been instituted prior to the 25th October, 1978, the first proviso shall have effect as it for the words "with effect from the date of institution of such proceedings" the words "with effect from a date not later than thirty days from the date aforementioned," had been substituted : Provided also that- (a) If the departmental proceedings are not completed within a period of one year from the date of institution thereof, fifty per cent of the pension withheld shall stand restored on the expiration of the aforesaid period of one year; (b) If the departmental proceedings are not completed within a period of two years from the date of institution the entire amount of pension so withheld shall stand restored on the expiration of the aforesaid period of two years; and (c) If in the departmental proceedings final order is passed to withhold or withdraw the pension or any recovery is ordered, the order shall be deemed to take effect from the date of the institution of departmental proceedings and the amount, of pension since withheld shall be adjusted in terms of the final order subject to the limit specified in sub-rule (5) of Rule 43]. (6) For the purpose of this rule- (a) departmental proceedings shall be deemed to be instituted on the date on which the statement of charges is issued to the Government servant or pensioner, or if the Government servant has been placed under suspension from an earlier date, on such date; and (b) judicial proceedings shall be deemed to be instituted- (i) in the case of criminal proceedings, on the date on which the complaint or report of a police officer, of which the Magistrate takes cognizance, is made, and (ii) in the case of civil proceedings, on the date the plaint is presented in the Court. It is correct that earlier this Court had concluded that for the purpose of Rule 9, the judicial proceedings deemed to be instituted in case of criminal proceedings on the date on which the Magistrate takes cognizance but in case Chandramani (supra) first time Coordinate Bench has held that proceedings shall be deemed to be instituted in case of criminal proceedings when complaint or report is made to the Police Officer, it means the deciding date would be on which complaint or report to the Police Officer is made not the date on which magistrate takes cognizance. 6. In case of civil proceedings shall be deemed to be instituted on the date when the plaint is presented in the Court. Likewise in criminal proceedings, the date should be when the complaint or report of the Police Officer is made on which the Magistrate takes cognizance, therefore, the judicial proceedings cannot said to be instituted unless the Magistrate takes cognizance of the complaint or report of the police officer and if the Magistrate declined to take cognizance then judicial proceedings shall not be treated as pending as the accused shall be discharged, therefore, merely filing a complaint or report of police would not be sufficient but the cognizance taken by the Magistrate on the said report shall be treated to be pendency of criminal proceedings against the Government employee. 7. Sub Rule 4 of Rule 9 applies to the retired Government employee against whom no criminal proceedings are pending at the time of retirement. If the criminal proceedings are instituted after retirement then pension and gratuity shall be sanctioned as per rule 64 of the M.P. Pension Rules. For ready reference Rules 64 of the M.P. Pension Rules are reproduced below:- 64. If the criminal proceedings are instituted after retirement then pension and gratuity shall be sanctioned as per rule 64 of the M.P. Pension Rules. For ready reference Rules 64 of the M.P. Pension Rules are reproduced below:- 64. Provisional pension where departmental or judicial proceeding may be pending.- (1) (a) In respect of Government servants refer to in sub-rule (4) of Rule 9 the Head of Office shall authorise the payment of provisional pension not exceeding the maximum pension and 50% of gratuity taking into consideration the gravity of charges levelled against such Government servant, which would have been admissible on the basis of qualifying service up to the date ,of retirement of the Government servant or if he was under suspension on the date of retirement, up to the date immediately preceding the date on which he was placed under suspension. (b) The provisional pension shall be drawn on establishment pay bill and paid to retired Government servant by the Head of Office during the period commencing from the date of retirement to the date on which upon conclusion of departmental or judicial proceedings, final orders are passed by the competent authority. (c) Provisional gratuity shall be drawn on establishment pay bill and paid to retired Government servant by the Head of Office after adjusting dues mentioned in sub-rule [(2)] of Rule 60, under intimation to Audi Office. Payment of provisional pension/gratuity made under sub-rule (1) shall be adjusted against final retirement benefit sanctioned to such Government servant upon conclusion of such proceedings, but no recovery shall be made where the pension/gratuity finally sanctioned is less than the provisional pension/gratuity or the pension/gratuity is reduced or withheld either permanently or for a specified period. 64A. Government servant on deputation. - In the case of a Government servant who retires from service, while on deputation or while on foreign service, action to sanction pension and gratuity in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter shall be taken by [x x x] the Head of Office of the departmental authority which sanctioned the deputation of the Government servant or sent him on foreign service. 8. 8. As per the conjoint reading of Rules 9 (4), 9(6) and 64 of the M.P. Pension Rules the pension of the retired employee shall be sanctioned under Rule 64 if the Magistrate takes cognizance of the complaint or report of the Police Officer, but the date on which the judicial proceedings shall deem to be instituted means on the date when complaint or report of Police Officer is made to the Competent Court for taking cognizance. In the second situation if after retirement no criminal proceedings are pending and pension and gratuity have been sanctioned and paid and after that criminal proceedings are instituted then the provisions of Rule 8 of the M.P. Pension Rules will apply. 9. In this case, the FIR was already registered against the petitioner at the time of the retirement hence respondents are justified in fixing the pension and gratuity as Rule 64 of the M.P. Pension Rules. Hence under Rule 9 (4) read with 64, part pension and gratuity have rightly been withheld. In view of above, Writ Petition is dismissed.