ORDER : 1. Petitioners were initially accused of offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC in Crime No. 299/2016 registered by Varthur Police Station. It appears, the victim succumbed to the injuries. After investigation, police have filed a charge sheet for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 120(B), 302 r/w 149 of IPC. Petitioners herein are accused Nos. 10 and 11. 2. Sri. T.H. Avin, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, adverting to the complaint lodged by the wife of the deceased, submitted that only four persons are named in the complaint. He argued that the complaint was lodged on 6.11.2016 and a further statement of the complainant was also recorded on 7.11.2016. Neither in the complaint nor in the further statement, the complainant has named these two petitioners as having taken part in the crime or being present at the place of occurrence. He further submits that accused Nos. 5 and 9 have been enlarged on bail by the learned Sessions Judge in Crl. Misc. No. 1846/16 dated 28/12/2016 and Crl. Misc. No. 2055/16 dated 16.1.2017, respectively. He argued that since the name of the petitioners is not found anywhere and they having been implicated in the case, they may be enlarged on bail by allowing this petition. 3. Opposing the petition, learned HCGP submits that according to the voluntary statement of the co-accused, petitioners were present at the time of incident whereby they shall be liable for prosecution under Section 149 of IPC for being members of unlawful assembly. Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of this petition. 4. I have given my careful consideration to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP and perused the complaint. In the complaint, only four persons namely Venkatesh, Gopal, Krishnamurthy and Babu are named as having committed the offence. The submission that names of petitioners are not found even in the further statement recorded on 7.11.2016, is not controverted by learned HCGP. The charge sheet is already filed by the police. The petitioners are in custody since 21.11.2016. In the circumstances, keeping in view the fact that the petitioners’ involvement is not forthcoming in the complaint and the further statement of the complainant, I am of the view that the petitioners deserve to be enlarged on bail. 5. The charge sheet is already filed by the police. The petitioners are in custody since 21.11.2016. In the circumstances, keeping in view the fact that the petitioners’ involvement is not forthcoming in the complaint and the further statement of the complainant, I am of the view that the petitioners deserve to be enlarged on bail. 5. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be allowed, subject to the following conditions: (i) Petitioners shall be released upon their executing a self bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- each with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court; (ii) Petitioners shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer during the further course of investigation, if any, and appear before him as and when called upon; (iii) Petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to prosecution witness or any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or investigating officer; (iv) Petitioners shall not involve themselves in any criminal activities; (v) If the petitioners violate any one of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail. Petition allowed.