5 . Mr. Routray, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are not responsible for the death of the deceased and in so far as the allegations in the F.I.R. i.e. Annexure-1 are concerned, it is based on hearsay evidence. Furthermore, it is submitted that the deceased was responsible for misappropriation of school fund as he did not handover the details of the charge and reconcile the financial irregularities, the fact which was intimated to the District Welfare Officer, Nabarangpur, who thereafter, instructed him to handover the charge and as such he was guilty of defalcation and misappropriation but unfortunately the local police failed to carry out investigation in a proper manner and ultimately chargesheeted them under the alleged offences including Section 306 IPC. It is claimed by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the deceased was directed to handover the charge between 31st July 2015 and 7th August, 2015 vide letter No. 1702 dated 29th July, 2015 of the District Welfare Officer, Nabarangpur as he had neither handed over any section wise charge list, the Utilization Certificates (U.C.) for the period of 2014-15 along with vouchers no mentioned the advance position in the original Cash Book etc. and in that connection, he had had been summoned but thereafter, for the reasons best known, he committed suicide as at no point of time, the petitioners ever ill-treated and misbehaved him, so therefore, according to Mr. Routray, learned counsel for the petitioners the investigation having not been properly conducted and concluded in perfunctory manner, the criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No.
