ORDER : This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking regular bail in Crime No.127/2015 of Wadi Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 r/w Section 34 of IPC. 2. It is the case of prosecution that a lady by name Reenabai had developed illicit intimacy with accused No.1. Though accused No.1 was already married, he developed intimacy with Reenabai but he refused to marry her on the ground that his family members may not accept for such marriage. However, the said Reenabai was forcing accused No.1 to marry her. In this regard, in order to remove the obstacle, accused No.1 along with accused Nos.2 and 3 hatched a conspiracy in order to do away with the life of deceased-Reenabai. In this background, it is alleged that on 03.10.2015 accused No.1 told accused Nos.2 and 3 to bring some weapon like knife and he took Reenabai on his motorcycle and accused Nos.2 to 4 have also followed accused No.1 and they reached near Gurasanagi road bridge-cum-barrage. At that place, accused persons have cut the neck of the deceased-Reenabai and committed her murder. Accused Nos.2 to 4 have facilitated accused No.1 to do away with the life of the deceased-Reenabai. Though at the initial stage missing complaint was filed by the uncle of deceased but subsequently, after thorough investigation, the police have found that petitioners and other persons were responsible for the death of Reenabai. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that except the last scene theory, there are no eyewitnesses to the alleged incident and the only evidence which is against the accused/petitioner is recovery of knife at his instance and there are no other direct evidence to connect the petitioner to the alleged crime. He would further submit that the other accused persons have already been released on bail by this Court and the petitioner also stands on the same footing, as such, on the ground of parity, he is also entitled to be released on bail. He would also contend that since the charge sheet has already been filed, the petitioner is not required for the purpose of further interrogation and investigation. He would also contend that since the charge sheet has already been filed, the petitioner is not required for the purpose of further interrogation and investigation. It is further contended that if the petitioner is released on bail, he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and he is ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition. 5. On the contrary, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State vehemently contended that petitioner is the main accused who took the deceased along with other accused persons and after going near Gurasanagi road, they have cut the neck of the deceased and thereby, they have committed heinous offence of murder as such, the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail. He has further contended that petitioner is a highly influential person and at this juncture, if the petitioner is released on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution witnesses, he may abscond and he may not be available for trial. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition. 6. I have carefully gone through the records and the charge sheet material which was made available to the Court. The said records would disclose that the entire case rests on the circumstantial evidence. The theory which has been put forth by the prosecution is that while accused No.1 along with other accused persons carrying the deceased on a motorcycle some of the witnesses have seen them and another circumstance which the prosecution is intending to rely upon is recovery of knife at the instance of the petitioner. Whether the said material would connect the petitioner to the alleged crime or not is a matter which has to be adjudicated only at the time of trial and not at this premature stage. The charge sheet has already been filed and there are no eyewitnesses to the alleged incident and on similar facts and circumstances, the other accused persons have already been released on bail. Therefore, I feel that even on the ground of parity the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. The apprehension expressed by the learned High Court Government Pleader that petitioner may abscond and may not be available for trial can be safeguarded by imposing stringent conditions and by taking adequate security. 7. Therefore, I feel that even on the ground of parity the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. The apprehension expressed by the learned High Court Government Pleader that petitioner may abscond and may not be available for trial can be safeguarded by imposing stringent conditions and by taking adequate security. 7. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case, the petition is allowed and petitioner/accused No.1 is ordered to be released on bail, subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court; (ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses; (iii) The petitioner shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; (iv) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail. (v) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court without its prior permission.