JUDGMENT Shivashankar Amarannavar, J. - This petition is filed by accused No.1 under Section 439 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Cr.P.C.', for brevity) seeking bail in Crime No.143/2020 of Ghataprabha. Police Station, registered for an offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of The Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC', for brevity). 2. The case of the prosecution is that one Laxman Hulkund filed the complaint contending that he and the petitioner/accused No.1 got married 7 years back and they have two children and he is staying with his wife, children and mother together. Near his house one Basavaraj Hulkund's house is situated and the said Basavaraj Hulkund is having illicit relationship with his wife for the last two years. It is further alleged that in this regard the complainant, his mother and elders of the village by name Shivappa Mardi and Ravi Gadadi together advised the petitioner not to talk to Basavaraj and despite the same, they continued their illicit relationship. It is further alleged that on 24.06.2020 at about 1.00 pm the complainant asked the petitioner to give meal and the petitioner gave two roties, sabji and sambar and while eating the complainant noticed some shining item in the plate and he immediately called his mother, Shivappa Mardi and Ravi Gadadi and shown it to them. It is further alleged that at that time Ravi Gadadi called some known person over phone and enquired about the shining item and the said person told that it is 'mercury'. Thereafter, they enquired the petitioner/accused No.1 and at that time, she told that accused No.2-Basavaraj Hulkund has given the said item to mix in the food. Thereafter, the complainant faced some problem and at that time, his mother and brother took him on vehicle and got admitted in KHI Hospital, Ghataprabha. The complainant filed complaint on 29.06.2020 in Ghataprabha police station and the same was registered in Crime No.143/2020 for an offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of IPC. The police arrested the petitioner/accused No.1 on 24.07.2020. The petitioner/accused No.1 filed bail application before the XI Additional District and Sessions Court, Belagavi in Crl.Misc.No.1124/2020 and the same came to be rejected by order dated 14.08.2020. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court seeking bail. 3. The police arrested the petitioner/accused No.1 on 24.07.2020. The petitioner/accused No.1 filed bail application before the XI Additional District and Sessions Court, Belagavi in Crl.Misc.No.1124/2020 and the same came to be rejected by order dated 14.08.2020. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court seeking bail. 3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused No.1 and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the incident has taken place on 24.06.2020 and there is a delay in filing the complaint as the complaint has been filed on 29.06.2020. It is his further submission that the petitioner is happily married with the complainant since last 7 years and they have two children. It is his further submission that only on allegation that the petitioner is having illicit relationship with the cousin of the complainant, a false case has been filed against her. It is his further submission that the petitioner is a women aged 24 years having two children and she has to take care of her two children and other family members. With these, he prayed for allowing the petition. 5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner/accused No.1 is the wife of the complainant and she has illicit relationship with accused No.2. The petitioner had mixed 'mercury' given by accused No.2 in food and served it to her husband with an intention to kill him. It is her further submission that CW-1 was in the hospital for 7 days and now he has been discharged. It is her further submission that investigation is still in progress and if the petitioner/accused No.1 is granted bail, she will hamper the investigation and tamper the prosecution witnesses. With this, she prayed to dismiss the petition. 6. Having regard to the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader, this Court has gone through the complaint and FIR. 7. The petitioner/accused No.1 is the wife of the complainant. The petitioner and the complainant's marriage took place about 7 years ago and they have two children. There is an allegation that the petitioner/accused No.1 is having illicit relationship with accused No.2. Whether the petitioner/accused No.1 made an attempt to commit the murder of her husband is, a matter of investigation and trial. In the present case, investigation is still in progress. There is an allegation that the petitioner/accused No.1 is having illicit relationship with accused No.2. Whether the petitioner/accused No.1 made an attempt to commit the murder of her husband is, a matter of investigation and trial. In the present case, investigation is still in progress. The petitioner is a married women having two children to look after. 8. It is well settled that matters to be considered in an application for bail are: "(i) Whether there is any prima facie or reasonable ground to believe that the accused had committed the offence; (ii) nature and gravity of the charge; (iii) severity of the punishment in the event of conviction; (iv) danger of the accused absconding or fleeing, if released on bail; (v) character, behaviour, means, position and standing of the accused; (vi) likelihood of the offence being repeated; (vii) reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with; and (viii) danger, of course, of justice being thwarted by grant of bail. While a vague allegation that the accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses, may not be a ground to refuse bail, if the accused is of such character that his mere presence at large would intimidate the witnesses or if there is material to show that he will use his liberty to subvert justice or tamper with the evidence, then bail will be refused." 9. In a decision in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of Uttara Pradesh and Another, (2018) 3 SCC 22 , the Hon'ble Apex Court held as under: "A fundamental postulate of criminal jurisprudence is the presumption of innocence, meaning thereby that a person is believed to be innocent until found guilty. However, there are instances in our criminal law where a reverse onus has been placed on an accused with regard to some specific offences but that is another matter and does not detract from the fundamental postulate in respect of other offences. Yet another important facet of our criminal jurisprudence is that the grant of bail is the general rule and putting a person in jail or in a prison or in a correction home (whichever expression one may wish to use) is an exception. Unfortunately, some of these basic principles appear to have been lost sight of with the result that more and more persons are being incarcerated and for longer periods. Unfortunately, some of these basic principles appear to have been lost sight of with the result that more and more persons are being incarcerated and for longer periods. This does not do any good to our criminal jurisprudence or to our society." 10. In the present case, investigation is still in progress. No grounds have been made out by the prosecution to show that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary. The petitioner was arrested on 24.07.2020. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. The petitioner is the resident of the address shown in the cause title and the same is not disputed. The main objection of the prosecution is that in the event of granting bail, the petitioner is likely to cause threat to the complainant and other prosecution witnesses. The said objection may be set right by imposing stringent conditions. 11. In the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of the counsel, this Court is of the view that there are valid grounds for granting bail subject to certain terms and conditions. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner/accused No.1 shall be released on bail in Crime No.143/2020 of Ghataprabha Police Station subject to the following conditions: i) The petitioner/accused No.1 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court. Due to COVID-19, the petitioner is permitted to furnish surety within two months. If circumstances arise, the jurisdictional Court is permitted to extend the period for furnishing surety. ii) The petitioner/accused No.1 shall not indulge in hampering the investigation and tampering the prosecution witnesses. iii) The petitioner/accused No.1 shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer in the investigation. iv) The petitioner/accused No.1 shall appear before the Investigating Officer whenever called for.