..(1).. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1823 OF 2008 Shri.Rajendra Vinayak Dixit. ..Applicant. Versus Shri.Subhash Genba Virkar and Ors. ..Respondents. .... Mr.Gupte D.M.Adv. for applicant. Mr.S.S.Pednekar, APP, FOR sTATE. Mr.Ujwal Agandsurve, Adv. for orig.complainant. .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATED : 24th July, 2008. DATED : 24th July, 2008. DATED : 24th July, 2008. P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in C.R.No.114 of 2008 of Lonikalbhor police station, Pune. The said case is under Sections 406, 468, 420 of IPC. 3. The applicant was working a Clerk in Ahilyabai Holkar Credit Society since 2006. Audit was conducted from 16th December, 2007 and it was found that the accounts did not tally in respect of an amount of Rs.5,64,465/-. The applicant was the only ..(2).. person who was entrusted with the entire work, during that period. 4. The learned Advocate for the applicant submitted that earlier he received a letter from the Society wherein it was stated that an amount of Rs.45,000/- was found missing and he submitted that thereafter the amount is shown as Rs.5,64,465/-. As far as this aspect is concerned, when the audit started Rs.45,000/- was not accounted for but thereafter after completion of the audit it was found that Rs.5,64,465/- was found missing. As stated earlier, the applicant was the only person entrusted with the entire work during that period. In my view the custody of the applicant would be necessary to find out the exact nature and extent of racket. Hence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. Application for anticipatory bail is rejected. (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)