1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4129 OF 2009 Chandrakant Ramchandra Chavan........ Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra ........Respondent. Mr. P.B. Walimbe i/b. T.A. Walimbe adv. for the Applicant Mr. Y.M. Nakhwa APP. for the Respondent/State. CORAM: A. P DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 18th September,2009. P. C.: 1. The present applicant is in the employment of Zilla Parishad Sindhudurg since last about 23 years. He is working in the post of Extension Officer, Agricultural in Panchayat Samiti. On an FIR filed by Block Development Officer C.R. No. 28/09 came to be registered by Vengurla police station against the applicant for commission of offence under sections 406, 408, 409 and 420 of IPC. Perusal of FIR reveals that there was a scheme under which the Zilla Parishad was to supply agriculatural equipments, articles and pesticides etc. to the agriculturist. Under the said scheme only after the agriculturist deposits the amount and shows the receipt of payment, the agricultural implements could be alloted. It is stated in the FIR that during 13­3­2009 to 21­5­2009 on account 2 of supply of goods and articles of the agriculture, the applicant had received from the agriculturists an amount towards consideration of sale, in the sum of Rs. 1,14,740/­. However, the said amount has not been deposited in the treasury and hence the offence has been registered against the applicant. 2. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant would consider about deposit of amount with Zilla Parishad. However the learned APP had placed on record adverse entries taken in the service record of the applicant, which reveals that even in past, the applicant has mis­appropriated the Government/Zilla Parishad’s money and thus he was punished and placed under suspension twice. The adverse entries reveal that in an earlier incident in the year 2002 the applicant had deposited a sum of Rs. 65,576/­. The copy of the service record is taken on record and marked as `X’ . If that be the position, in my view this is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. The application stands rejected. (A. P. Deshpande, J.)