ORDER : This is a petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. 2. One Sameena, wife of the petitioner initiated proceedings under Section 200 Cr.P.C. for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 323, 498(A) and 307 read with Section 109 and Section 34 IPC and also Sections 3, 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Including the petitioner totally 5 accused were implicated. The Magistrate referred the matter for investigation to the police who filed charge sheet thereafter. Initially the petitioner was admitted to anticipatory bail and later on he also obtained regular bail. But he violated the bail conditions and flew away to Saudi Arabia. For this reason, the charge sheet against the petitioner came to be split and trial was held against the other accused. It appears that the other accused were acquitted. When the petitioner returned to India on 27.06.2018, he was arrested at the airport and therefore he has sought for bail now. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner admits that the petitioner did violate bail condition, but now he undertakes that he will not violate any condition imposed by this court in case bail is granted and he is ready to face trial. He also submits that the police have already seized his passport. The petitioner is in custody for the last more than one month and therefore he prays for enlarging the petitioner on bail. 4. The High Court Government Pleader opposes the grant of bail by submitting that in case bail is granted, there is no guarantee that the petitioner will appear before the court. 5. Here is the accused who went to a foreign country by violating the bail condition. Now question that remains is whether he will appear before the court in case he is released on bail. Since it is submitted that the police have already seized his passport, it cannot be said that he will once again go to foreign country. Moreover his parents are residents of Bengaluru and he has deep roots here. The other accused have been acquitted. It is a matter to be taken into consideration. Hence there is no impediment for granting bail to the petitioner by subjecting him to some stringent conditions. Hence the following: ORDER (a) Petition is allowed. Moreover his parents are residents of Bengaluru and he has deep roots here. The other accused have been acquitted. It is a matter to be taken into consideration. Hence there is no impediment for granting bail to the petitioner by subjecting him to some stringent conditions. Hence the following: ORDER (a) Petition is allowed. (b) Petitioner shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No. 74/2009 registered by Women Police Station, Bengaluru District on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) and providing two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The petitioner is also subjected to the following conditions: (1) He shall provide security of immovable property standing either in his name or in any of his relative’s name to the satisfaction of the trial court. (2) He shall regularly appear before the Court during trial. Even his absence on a single day shall be viewed seriously by the trial court for cancellation of bail. (3) He shall not threaten the witnesses and tamper with the prosecution evidence. (4) He shall not apply for return of his passport till conclusion of trial.