JUDGMENT : H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD, J. 1. This petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioners-accused Nos. 1 and 2 seeking bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No. 239/2018 of Kagwad Police Station relating to C.C. No. 795/2019 pending on the file of the Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Athani, for the offences punishable under Sections 447 read with Section 34 of IPC. 2. The brief facts of the case are that one Ashok Tavanappa Aski serving as Assistant Executive Engineer in Rural Drinking Water and Sanitation, Sub-Division, Athani is the complainant. It is stated in the complaint that in 2008 jack well has been constructed on the bank of Krishna river within the limits of Ainapur and water being supplied to 30 villages. On 18.11.2018 at about 9:30 a.m. the official in-charge of said jackwell i.e. Mahesh Tammanna Jadhav and Manjunath Sadashiv Madiwal intimated that the petitioners herein along with accused No. 3 and other 10-12 persons of Ainapur village trespassed into the area where jackwell is situated and locked the room where T.C. D-well and jackwell and thereby caused obstruction in public work. Hence, complaint was lodged by the complainant. Thereupon the Police registered the case in the aforesaid crime and after investigation, charge sheet is filed. The petitioners apprehending their arrest have come up with this petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners are innocent, they have not at all committed the alleged offences as alleged by the complainant and they have been falsely implicated in this case. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. There are no prima facie materials against the petitioners for commission of the alleged offences and the Police are making hectic efforts to arrest these petitioners without there being any reason. He further contended that the petitioners are permanent residents of the address shown in the petition and having both movable and immovable properties. The petitioners are not having any criminal antecedents and if the petitioners are let on bail, they will not tamper or attempt to tamper with the prosecution witnesses and they are ready to abide by any terms and conditions imposed by the Court. Further they are ready and willing to furnish adequate surety to the satisfaction of the Court. The petitioners are not having any criminal antecedents and if the petitioners are let on bail, they will not tamper or attempt to tamper with the prosecution witnesses and they are ready to abide by any terms and conditions imposed by the Court. Further they are ready and willing to furnish adequate surety to the satisfaction of the Court. Hence, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks grant of bail to the petitioners. 4. Per contra, the learned HCGP for the respondent-State contended that the petitioners are absconding from the date of commission of the alleged offences and CWs. 2 to 6 are the eye-witnesses to the alleged incident. It is further contended that there are prima facie materials against the petitioners for commission of alleged offences and at this stage, if the anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioners, they may tamper with the prosecution witnesses and hamper the trial of the case. Therefore, the learned HCGP seeks for dismissal of the petition filed by the petitioners. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned HCGP for the respondent-State, perused the prosecution records available at this stage. 6. Having heard the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned HCGP for the respondent-State, it is evident that on 18.11.2018 at about 9:30 a.m. the petitioners herein along with accused No. 3 and other 10-12 persons of Ainapur village trespassed into the area where jackwell is situated and locked the room where T.C. D-well and jackwell and thereby caused obstruction in public work. Except these materials there are no other materials available on record. At this stage it is needless to make elaborate discussion and to give specific finding on the materials produced by the learned HCGP and the same is not permissible while considering the bail application. The grounds stated in the bail petition and the submission of the counsel and the documents produced along with the petition goes to prove the apprehension regarding their arrest and detention. The objections raised by the prosecution regarding tampering of witnesses can be set right by imposing stringent conditions. 7. In the facts and circumstances of the case and the grounds urged in the bail petition, the petition deserves to be allowed. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER: The petition is allowed. The objections raised by the prosecution regarding tampering of witnesses can be set right by imposing stringent conditions. 7. In the facts and circumstances of the case and the grounds urged in the bail petition, the petition deserves to be allowed. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER: The petition is allowed. The petitioners are directed to appear before concerned Court within 15 days on any working day, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On their appearance, the Court shall enlarge them on bail subject to following conditions: (i) The petitioners shall furnish personal bond in a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- each (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court. (ii) The petitioners shall appear before the Court as and when required. (iii) The petitioner shall not threaten or allure the prosecution witnesses. 8. If the petitioners are found to have violated any of the bail conditions, the present bail order shall stand automatically cancelled.