ORDER : ARUN MONGA, J. 1. Petitioner seeks quashing of an FIR No.0276/2023 dated 23.10.2023 registered at Police Station Lunkaransar, District Bikaner under Section 409 of IPC. 2. The brief facts leading to the instant petition are that the FIR alleges that on 21.10.2023, the District Collector and RSGSM constituted a committee for the physical verification of Liquor Dipo Lunkaransar, where a total of 3,819 cartons of liquor were found missing. Subsequently, an order dated 19.10.2023 led to the formation of another committee by the SDO, which reported that 2,609 cartons were missing. The petitioner, a class-IV employee, claims that Rupendra Singh, who was in charge, went on leave from 15.04.2023 after assuring the petitioner that all stocks were up to date. Despite this, the petitioner has also been implicated in the FIR. He is innocent and falsely arrayed as an accused. 4. In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. At the very outset, learned Public Prosecutor states that the investigation is still underway and the truth will unfold in course thereof and the petitioner has been filed without awaiting the outcome thereof. In case he found innocent in course of investigation, he will be dropped from array of the accused. 6. The stand taken by the learned Public Prosecutor seems to be reasonable. 7. In any case, having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and after perusal of the case file as well as contents of the FIR, I am of the view that not only the arguments canvassed before this Court, but even otherwise all the grounds taken in the petition are all factual assertions and no illegality or any irregularity in law otherwise has been pointed out so as to warrant interference of this Court. 8. Furthermore, trite law it is that to exercise discretionary powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. vested with this Court, the contents of the FIR should be such that on a bare reading of the same no offence is made out qua the accused, who has approached the Court. 9. In the present case, no such ingredients are made out from the FIR seeking quashing of the same. 9. In the present case, no such ingredients are made out from the FIR seeking quashing of the same. Needless to say that the truth-will unravel only in the course of investigation and it is not for this Court at this nascent stage to express any opinions on the same while adjudicating on the veracity of the FIR. 10. As an upshot, no grounds to interfere. The petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to seek his remedy under law, which may otherwise be available to him at the appropriate stage before the competent court after the investigation is complete. 11. It is made clear that non-interference by this Court should not be construed as an expression of merits on the allegations made in the FIR and the investigating agency shall proceed further in accordance with law uninfluenced by the non-interference of this court. 12. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.