{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4318 OF 2009 Ashok s/o Wamanrao Bankar APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & Another RESPONDENTS ....... Mr.A.H.Kapadia, Advocate for applicant Mr.N.R.Shaikh, APP for respondents State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 14 th December 2009 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.145/2009 registered with Nanalpeth Police Station, Parbhani for an offence punishable u/s 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant followed by the submissions of the learned APP. Perused the papers of investigation carried out till today. {2} 3. It appears that at the material time, since 15th March 2004, present applicant is working as a cashier cum clerk with Allahabad Bank, Branch Jambh, Dist-Parbhani. It is alleged that on 02.09.2009, a complaint was received by the Bank Manager of the said branch that on 31st August 2009, one Vishal Daithankar had deposited Rs.21,000/- in account No.88 and Rs.1,25,000/- in account No.86 however, on his inquiry, he learnt that the said amount was not deposited in the account. He has also annexed copies of the counter slips along with his compliant. It is also alleged that on verification of the registers maintained in the bank, it transpired that no entires of the said counter slips are effected in the same. 4. Similar type of complaints are received from more than 15 persons, whose names are enclosed along with list and account numbers and the amount deposited by them. 5. It is urged on behalf of the applicant that the system / procedure, followed in the bank is that, there are only three employees working in the said branch and unless scroll number is given by the Manager, no amount can be deposited or withdrawn from the said branch. It is further urged that on 5 th September 2009, after the complaint was received, leave note was submitted by the present applicant to the bank authorities, as he was suffering from jaundice and hence was unable to attend the duty. In the premise, he was not on duty and considering the fact that {3} the register is in custody of the police, he be released on anticipatory bail, as he is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency. 6. These submissions are opposed by the learned APP. According him, the statement of wife of the applicant is recorded, which shows that the applicant is not suffering from any illness, as alleged. On the contrary, on 5th September 2009, onwards he has not visited even his house and hence the wife of the applicant has lodged a missing complaint, as her husband has not turned up since 05.09.2009. According to her, on 08.09.2009, she learnt that a complaint is lodged against the applicant in respect of misappropriation. 7. Considering these submissions, it is clear that there are complaints of the customers in respect of amount deposited by them with the present applicant, which are not credited to their respective accounts. At the same time, it has to bear in mind that the present applicant is working as a cashier and it is his duty to enter the amounts received, in the register maintained in the bank. 8. So far as submissions that leave note was submitted by the applicant on 5 th, as he was suffering from jaundice, is concerned, the same cannot be accepted in view of the statement of the wife of the applicant and it is correctly pointed out by the learned APP that if the case of the applicant is to be accepted as {4} genuine, then the wife is a fit person, who can make statement to that effect. However, the wife of the applicant has categorically stated that in the morning of 5th September 2009, the applicant has left the house to attend duties and thereafter, not turned up. On this count, she has also lodged a compliant of missing. It goes to show that the statement made on behalf of the applicant, cannot be accepted. If there is mess in respect of funds in lacs of rupees, which were deposited with the applicant and he is absconding since the date of the complaint, then it cannot be said that he was on leave and hence not attended the duty. Prima facie, case is made out in respect of misappropriation of the funds. In the premise, no case made out to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 9. In the result, the application, which is sans merits, stands rejected. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/criapln4318-09