{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4551 OF 2009 Walmik s/o Bhivsen Nagargoje APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & Another RESPONDENTS ....... Mr.S.K.Kulkarni, Advocate for applicant Mr.N.R.Shaikh, APP for the respondents State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 5th January 2010 PER COURT: 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for his release on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with CR No.209/2009 registered with Majalgaon police station for an offence punishable u/s 409, 467, 471, 420 of the Indian Penal Code and u/s 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant followed by the submissions of the learned APP. Perused the papers of investigation. {2} 3. It appears that a complaint came to be registered on the basis of a report lodged by the Supply Inspector, Majalgaon. It is alleged that at the relevant time, the applicant was working as a Godowoon keeper and having overall control over the stock of food grains and palm oil stored in the said godowoon. During a surprise visit, it was noticed that total 1948.85 quintal wheat, 1421.90 qunital rice and 230 liters palm oil was found short than the actual stock shown in the register. Apart from it, during the investigation, it is revealed that 16 truck loads of food grains were received by the applicant, however the same was never entered in the register maintained at the said godowoon. It is alleged that the applicant is responsible for the said shortage of the food grains and oil, cost of which is to the tune of Rs.15,66,570/-. 4. According to learned counsel for the applicant, due of not handling the food grains properly by the Hamals, the said stock was found short. It is not disputed that the short of food grains was noticed during the surprise visit. It is tried to urge that as the entire documents are seized and the witnesses are superior officers, who are not amenable to the applicant and hence custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary. 5. The application is opposed by the learned APP on the ground that there is prima facie involvement of the applicant in the said offence. {3} 6. Considering the rival submissions, it is clear that the short of food grains noticed during the surprise visit is not of a small but a very large quantity. Considering the quantum of short of food grains, which was entrusted to the applicant, and also in view of the fact that 16 truck loads of food grains which were received by him, are not entered into the register, the applicant is answerable for the same and for which his custodial interrogation is essential. There is prima facie evidence against the applicant. No case is made out to exercise discretion u/s 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. 7. In the result, the application, which is sans merits, stands rejected. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/A10/criapln4551-09