LAKHAJI PANCHUBHA ABADA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant original accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in case of his arrest in connection with the FIR registered as C.R No.I-4 of 2019 dated 24.12.2019 before Jakhau Police Station, District: Kutchh West, Bhuj for the offences under Sections 406 , 409 , 420 , 465 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person and falsely implicated in the offence. It is contended that the complaint is filed by the rival who had lost the election. It is contended that the entire payment was made by the TDO himself. It is contended that the applicant has not played any role in the construction of cattle shed. It is contended that the present applicant is roped in the offence because he is the brother of the accuse No.3, who is a Supervisor. It is contended that the applicant is serving at the post of Surpanch and Talati-cum-Mantri is released on bail by the trial court. It is contended that most of the amount which is alleged to be misappropriated, is re-deposited with the Government, before the FIR was filed. It is contended that TDO is not made accused in the offence and it is the duty of the TDO to carry out investigation with regard to the payments. It is contended that the present applicant is not named in the FIR. Thus, the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail by imposing suitable conditions.

(3.) Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail and submitted that the investigation is yet to be completed, under the circumstances, there would not be the case that the TDO would not be charged with the offence. It is contended that the brother of the applicant is serving as a Supervisor and in connivance with his brother, the Government money has been siphoned away and deposited in the accounts of the relatives of the present applicant. It is contended that all the allegations in the complaint clearly shows the involvement of the present applicant and the investigation is at the crucial stage. Thus, looking to the seriousness of the offence, the present application may be rejected.