{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.332 OF 2010 Pratibha w/o Ramesh Patil APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others RESPONDENTS WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.356 OF 2010 Gulab s/o Nimba Badgujar & others APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others RESPONDENTS ....... Mr.S.G.Ladda, Advocate for applicants Mr.N.R.Shaikh, APP for respondents State Mr.V.B.Patil, Advocate for original complainant ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 10th March 2010 PER COURT: 1. By these applications, the applicants have prayed to release them on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with CR No.7/2010 registered with Zilla Peth police station for an offence punishable u/s 420, 468, 471 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and u/s 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. {2} 2. Applicants Gulab and Mukesh are attached to R.R.High School while applicants Dagadu and Prashant are attached to B.K.Lathi School. Applicant Pratibha is attached to R.R.High School, however, according to her not in the capacity as Head Mistress. 3. Heard learned counsel for the applicants followed by learned APP, who is assisted by learned counsel for original complainant. Perused the record. 4. The said offence is registered on the complaint of District Supply Officer. It is alleged that the complainant on receiving information from one Gajanan Malpure, gave surprise visit to both the schools where the applicants are serving. It is not disputed that both the schools are implementing the scheme of Central Government of "Shaleya Poshan Aahar". It is informed that 100 gm rice is provided to each student of 1 to 5th standard whereas 150 gm rice is provided to each student of 6th to 8th standard. There are 757 students taking education in B.K.Lathi school of 1st to 4th standards and 465 students are studying in 5th standard in R.R. High School and 1504 students are studying in 6th to 8th standards with R.R. High School. According to learned counsel for applicants the concerned schools require to submit indent of their requirement in respect of rice under the said scheme to the District Supply Officer. It is also urged that the school authorities are not cooking the food. The said contract is {3} given to certain cooking agency, which prepares the food from the rice provided to them. It is urged that when the rice was supplied in deficit, the said cooking agency used to purchase the deficit rice from open market and after receipt of the same from the Supply Officer, they used to return the same. 5. It has to be noted that during the surprise visit registers were checked and the entries were found to be correct. However, when search of the premises was taken 160 bags of rice were found containing 80 quintals of rice. According to the applicants the said rice was the quota given to the cooking agency to return to the trader from where the rice was purchased when the same was supplied in deficit. Now the question is as to whether any registers are maintained for the said arrangement or not. 6. During the investigation registers are seized. It was noted by the Court that copies of the said registers were furnished to the IO and hence directions were given to produce the original registers. It is not disputed that though on the date of raid, the entries in the registers maintained by the said schools were correct yet 80 quintals of rice was found stored in the premises of the said school. The record of the month of November appears to be maintained with pencil while the rest of the record is maintained with ink. Now question arose, if the entire record except of one month is written in ink, for which according to learned counsel for the applicants it is urged that as it was the festive season and {4} there were holidays to schools, less quantity of rice was consumed and no indent was submitted and the rice which was balance was returned to the cooking agency. Point for consideration is that the entires of this month where less quota was utilized the same are in pencil and the same needs to be viewed seriously. 7. Now for the rice which was found stored or for the record maintained, whether the applicants are responsible or not has to be considered. The school authorities have to maintain correct record of the stock provided to them. If it is so the applicants have to account for the stock stored. The stock, received, utilized and returned to the cooking agency is the internal arrangement and the framers of the scheme have nothing to do with the same. However, it is for the school authorities to account for the stock received by them. I am not satisfied with the submissions of learned counsel for the applicants. In the premise, considering the record before this Court, clarification can be sought from the applicants if made available for custodial interrogation and hence no case is made out to enlarge the applicants on anticipatory bail. 8. In the result, applications which are sans merits stand rejected. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/A10/criapln332-356-10