ORDER : This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking regular bail in Crime No.69/2016 of Bableshwar Police Station, (C.C.No.1927/2016 pending on the file of II Addl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) & JMFC Court, Vijayapur), registered for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of IPC. 2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that, accused No.1 and accused No.2 both are friends of deceased Basavaraj. The complainant Bhimappa is the elder brother of the deceased. Accused No.1 Mahakut being the friend of deceased Basavaraj frequently visiting the house of the complainant. Then complainant and his younger brother told accused No.1 not to visit their house frequently as there are women in the house. Being enraged and because of the said advise of the complainant, Accused No.1 was having enmity towards the complainant and his brother. On 21.3.2016 accused Nos.1 and 2 took the deceased Basavaraj from his house at Babaleshwar village towards the play ground of Shantveer college and in furtherance of their common intention to commit the murder of Basavaraj, picked up quarrel with him, accused No.2 tightly caught hold both the hands of the deceased and accused No.1 lifted and threw the stone on the face of Basavaraj, due to which, he has sustained grievous injuries on his face. Immediately, he was admitted to Govt. Hospital, Vijayapur, but, since his health did not improve, he was advised to be shifted to Miraj hospital for higher treatment and when he was being shifted to Miraj hospital, on the way, he succumbed to the injuries on 23.02.2016. On the basis of the said complaint, case came to be registered against the petitioner and accused No.2 for the said offences. 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 there are no eyewitnesses to the alleged incident and the only circumstance on which the prosecution is brining home the guilt of the accused is the last seen of the accused along with the deceased. It is contended that already accused No.2 has been released on bail by this Court on the same material, as such, the petitioner is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. It is contended that already accused No.2 has been released on bail by this Court on the same material, as such, the petitioner is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. It is also contended that there is no prima-facie material to connect the petitioner to the alleged crime. 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 C.Ws.8 to 14 are the eyewitnesses, who have seen the deceased going along with the accused persons before the alleged incident and even there is an ill will or a motive pointed out against the accused persons. He has also contended that the petitioner has committed a serious offence, which is punishable with death or imprisonment for life. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition. 6. I have perused the grounds urged in the petition, FIR, complaint and the charge-sheet material. 7. Looking to the complaint averments, it indicate that on the date of incident, accused Nos.1 and 2 said to have been taken the deceased along with them in the night at about 11.30 p.m. and thereafter wards the deceased did not come back to home and on the next day in the morning hours, somebody informed that the brother of the complainant was lying with injuries in front of Shantveer college. Thereafter he shifted to the hospital and subsequently he succumbed to the injuries. Looking to the material collected during the course of investigation, there are no eyewitnesses and there are no overtacts specifically alleged against the petitioner in the said papers, except the voluntary statement of accused No.1. Whether the said voluntary statement has to be believed or not is a matter, which has to be adjudicated at the time of trial. When already accused No.2 who is said to have been in the company of accused No.1 has been released on bail, even on the ground of parity, the petitioner is also entitled to be released on bail. When already accused No.2 who is said to have been in the company of accused No.1 has been released on bail, even on the ground of parity, the petitioner is also entitled to be released on bail. Leave apart this, when already the charge-sheet has been filed, the petitioner is not required for the purpose of further interrogation or investigation and when there are no eyewitnesses to the alleged crime, under such circumstances, I feel that by imposing some stringent conditions, if the petitioner is released on bail, it would safeguard the interest of the prosecution and it would meet the ends of justice. 8. For the above reasons, 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 likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court; ii. The petitioner shall not tamper with any the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly; iii. The petitioner shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; iv. The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on all the dates of hearing without fail.