{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 164 OF 2010 Arjun Kashinath Pawar APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mrs.S.S.Jadhav, Advocate for applicant Mr.N.B.Patil, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 5th February 2010 PER COURT: 1. By this application the applicant has prayed to release him on bail in connection with CR No.100/2009 registered with Pimpalner police station, Dist-Beed for an offence punishable u/s 406 and 409 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant followed by learned APP. 3. Admittedly, the applicant is the godown keeper and was in charge of the food grains stored in the said godown meant {2} for Public Distribution Scheme. On 12.08.2009, the applicant has collected a chart showing the position of food grains received, distributed and balance in the godown. According to learned counsel for applicant, as per record, as on 12.08.2009, there was no short of food grains except 36 liters of oil. It is contended that after rejection of anticipatory bail application of the applicant, the applicant has surrendered on 10.12.2009 and since then he is in jail and in view of the fact that all the record is seized and major investigation is over, further detention of the applicant is not necessary. 4. Learned APP, while opposing the application, brought to my notice that the chart on which reliance is placed by the applicant showing the stock position of the godown, is not as per the actual physical stock in the godown. Learned APP has relied on the Panchanma dated 16.08.2009, showing that the stock stored in the godown was verified and rice, wheat and palm oil are found short. Learned APP has also shown various registers maintained in the said godown, which indicate goods received and supplied to the fair price shop owners. It is contended that the entries in the register show that the goods were received and dispatched to various fair price shop owners, however, there are no signatures of the concerned persons to whom the goods are dispatched for distribution. It is also contended that investigation in that behalf is still going on and the applicant is not cooperating the investigating agency. It is contended that the applicant has defalcated goods {3} worth Rs.22 lacs. 5. Considering the rival submissions and allegations that the entries in the chart dated 12.08.2009 are mere paper work and not as per actual physical stock, as indicated in Panchanama dated 16.08.2009, it is not safe to release the applicant on bail when the investigation is still in progress. 6. In the result, the application, which is sans merits stands rejected. It is however clarified that these are the prima facie observations based on the record before this Court and the trial court need not be influenced by the same. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/A10/criapln164-10