JUDGMENT NARESH H PATIL, J. :- Perused the complaint. The Auditor's complaint mentions that orders were placed for supplying certain material for the benefit of sugar factory namely, Indira Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Limited, Pusegaon, Taluka Sengaon, District Hingoli ("the Karkhana"). The Karkhana went into liquidation and thereafter was wounded up. The Auditor submitted his report. In the complaint it was stated that 19 Directors were looking after day to day affairs of the Karkhana. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is in no way concerned with the work of supplying articles to the Karkhana. It is submitted that he was one of the partners but the partnership firm was dissolved as one partner died. 3. We have perused the earlier orders passed by this Court. Learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in Thermax Limited v. K.M. Johny, (2011) 13 SCC 412 : (2011 ALL MR (Cri) 3603 (S.C.)] to submit that it is basically a dispute of civil nature and the criminal prosecution is not to be entertained. The learned counsel on instructions submits that the Auditor's report is stayed by the State Government. 4. The Auditor has been made party respondent to this application but he has neither put his appearance nor any reply is filed. 5. Prima facie perusal of the complaint shows that after verifying the record the Auditor arrived at conclusion that the money advanced is required to be recovered. The question before the investigating agency is as to whether the Auditor's report has been stayed by the State Government or has not been acted upon. In case the Auditor's report is not stayed by the State Government then the investigating agency will have to look into as to whether the applicant was in any way concerned with the work of supply of articles, machinery to the Karkhana. 6. At this stage it would not be appropriate to set aside the complaint in exercise of powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. At the same time we keep all the issues open for the applicant to redress his grievances at an appropriate time if in future any adverse report is filed. ORDER (A) The investigating agency shall take appropriate steps in light of the observations made by us as above. At the same time we keep all the issues open for the applicant to redress his grievances at an appropriate time if in future any adverse report is filed. ORDER (A) The investigating agency shall take appropriate steps in light of the observations made by us as above. (B) The applicant to cooperate with the investigating agency as and when required. It is informed that the applicant is granted anticipatory bail. In case the applicant's presence is required we direct the investigating agency to issue him 72 hours prior notice. (C) It is clarified that we have not expressed any opinion in respect of the contentions raised and allegations made in the complaint by the Auditor. (D) The application is dismissed. Rule discharged. Application dismissed.