FRANCIS Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the petition filed by the petitioners/accused 1 and 2 under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 seeking anticipatory bail to direct the respondent-Police to release the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 420, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered by the respondent-Police Station in Crime No. 36 of 2014. Heard the arguments of the learned Counsel for the petitioners/accused and also the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioners during the course of his argument submitted that the petitioners have not at all involved in the alleged offences and they have been falsely implicated in the case. Learned Counsel made the submission that even according to the averments made in the complaint, the allegations are against the Hospital Authorities, who are working in the said establishment and not against the present petitioners. He also submitted that there is delay in lodging the complaint and delay in submitting the FIR before the Magistrate. He submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide by any of the conditions imposed by the Court. Hence, he submitted to allow the petition.

(3.) As against this, learned High Court Government Pleader during the course of his argument submitted that looking to the allegations made in the complaint and also statement of witnesses recorded by the Investigating Officer during the investigation, it clearly goes to show that the petitioners committed the alleged offences. He submitted that the present petitioners are absconded. Their custodial interrogation is necessary to the Investigating Officer and he has to collect the documents also. Hence, he submitted that when investigation of the case is still pending, the petitioners are not entitled with anticipatory bail. Hence, he submitted to reject the application.