JUDGMENT 1. This petition is filed by the petitioners who are arraigned as accused No.1 and 3 seeking regular bail in C.C.No.2581/2019 arising out of Crime No.74/2019 of Vidyagiri Police Station, Dharwad, for the offences punishable under Section 395 read with Section 420 of IPC. Since from the date of their arrest, petitioners are in judicial custody. Therefore, they have filed this successive petition seeking for enlargement on regular bail for the grounds urged therein. 2. Heard learned Senior counsel Shri Ravi B. Naik for the petitioners and learned HCGP for the State. 3. Factual matrix of the case is as under: It is stated in the written complaint dated 7.5.2019 filed by CW-1 Shri Ravi Kumar that the accused have committed the alleged offences narrated in detail in the written complaint filed by him. The complainant had been informed by one Fayaz that he would procure him gold at a lesser value than market price at Dharwad. Believing the same, the complainant along with another friend had met one Moulana and Prakash and he had negotiated the price quoted by them. Prakash/Accused No.1 is said to have handed him over a gold biscuit weighing 100 grams and the same was also assessed by the gold smith and was certified to be genuine. Hence, the complainant had gone with Rs.15 lakhs in his handbag to purchase the gold. On seeing the same, Prakash had snatched the bag from the complainant and had tried to flee with the amount as alleged. When the complainant had resisted, he is said to have been restrained by 8 to 10 persons carrying knives. On the said allegations, a complaint was registered in Cr.No.74/2019 against the accused persons. The Investigating Officer after conducting thorough investigation, filed a charge-sheet against the accused before the committal court in C.C.No.2581/2019. 4. Learned Senior Counsel Shri Ravi B. Naik appearing for the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 3 contends that both of them were apprehended on 10.05.2019 and since then they are in judicial custody. He firstly contends that though the complainant had approached Accused Nos.1 to 5 only after being lured by the talks of CW-8 Fayaz Khan, the said Fayaz Khan has not been arraigned as an accused but only as a witness, which creates a doubt in the case of the prosecution suggesting that a false case is foisted against the petitioners. He firstly contends that though the complainant had approached Accused Nos.1 to 5 only after being lured by the talks of CW-8 Fayaz Khan, the said Fayaz Khan has not been arraigned as an accused but only as a witness, which creates a doubt in the case of the prosecution suggesting that a false case is foisted against the petitioners. Secondly, it is his contention that on 10.05.2019 the Investigating Agency had received credible information after which they had deputed Police Constables CW-18, CW-19, CW-20, CW-21 and CW-22 along with whom the I.O. and two witnesses had proceeded in their vehicle and on finding Accused Nos.1 to 3 in a car who were in the process of sharing the amounts after which the police had apprehended them, is a created story of the prosecution which cannot be believed by any prudent person. Hence, he contends that this raises a suspicion in the case of the prosecution. It is his further contention that though the charge sheet material revealed that accused were arrested on 10.05.2019, the Test Identification Parade was held only on 6.7.2019, i.e., after a delay of more than 55 days. Hence, it is the contention of the learned Senior counsel that the delay in conduct of TIP has been in order to tutor the prosecution witnesses to falsely implicate the petitioners in the alleged crime. Further, the case of the prosecution that accused persons had hired a house in the heart of the city to commit robbery, is impossible to be believed. The further ground urged by the learned Senior counsel for the petitioners is that the first petitioner/Accused No.1 has a family consisting of his wife and three minor children aged 11 years, 7 years and 5 months. Further that his two school-going children are not able to pursue their education since they have not paid fees for the academic year. Hence he contends that if the accused is kept behind bars for a longer period, his family members would be ruined in the society. The second petitioner/Accused No.3 being the eldest son his family has the responsibility of looking after his parents, four daughters and two sons. Further it is stated that two of his elder sisters are undergoing postpartum care in his house. Hence, if he is kept behind bars for a longer period, his family members as well would be ruined in the society. Further it is stated that two of his elder sisters are undergoing postpartum care in his house. Hence, if he is kept behind bars for a longer period, his family members as well would be ruined in the society. It is hence submitted by the learned Senior counsel that the accused are ready to abide by any terms and conditions imposed by this court while granting bail to them. Further the investigation is completed and the charge sheet has been filed against the petitioners and they are no longer required for the purpose of further investigation and moreover they are in judicial custody since from the date of their arrest. On all these grounds, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks for allowing this successive bail petition by enlarging the petitioners on regular bail. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP for respondent State has taken me through the averments made in the complaint and as regards the involvement of the accused in committing the alleged offences as narrated in Cr.No.74/2019 for the offences under Section 395 read with Section 420 IPC. As on the aforesaid date of the incident, the informant and his friends had assembled near the particular house at around 5.00 p.m., wherein Accused No.1/Prakash brought 100 grams of gold bar and an appraiser had tested the same and had confirmed the same to be original. Then the first informant had taken Rs.15 lakhs from his car in order to purchase the gold biscuit. But the said Prakash had snatched the cash from him forcibly. Further, other accused also had surrounded the informant with deadly weapons and attempted to snatch the cash and caused injury to him. The fact that accused had taken to heel from there itself indicates that accused had committed the alleged offences and moreover if the accused are supposed to be released on bail, certainly there shall be adverse impact on the society. Perusal of the charge-sheet indicates that I.O. during the course of investigation had seized Rs.27 lakhs worth properties, i.e., cash, knives, vehicles, from the custody of the petitioners/accused. That itself indicates that the petitioners had taken the house on monthly rent by giving false Aadhar card and other materials, to the house owner. He further contends that unless new grounds have been urged with new circumstances, the accused ought not to be enlarged on bail. That itself indicates that the petitioners had taken the house on monthly rent by giving false Aadhar card and other materials, to the house owner. He further contends that unless new grounds have been urged with new circumstances, the accused ought not to be enlarged on bail. These are all contentions taken by the learned HCGP for the State seeking for dismissal of the successive bail petition filed by the accused. 6. In the context of the contentions urged by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned HCGP for the State, it is seen that subsequent to registration of crime against the accused, the I.O. has thoroughly investigated the case and laid the charge-sheet against them in C.C.No.2581/2019. Learned counsel has produced the charge-sheet consisting of statement of witnesses and so also the mahazar said to have been conducted by the I.O. during the course of investigation. During investigation, the I.O. has conducted TIP by facilitating them before the competent authority. Chargesheet has been laid by the I.O. by thoroughly investigating the aforesaid crime. The accused are in judicial custody since from the date of their arrest. The circumstance that has to be taken into consideration in this case is that the first petitioner has a family consisting of his wife and minor children aged 11 years, 7 years and 5 months and the second petitioner being the eldest son in his family is required to take care of his old aged parents and particularly his two elder sisters who are undergoing postpartum care in his house. Whereas in the present case on hand, it is necessary to state that the court should avoid elaborate documentation of merits while dealing with a petition for bail. The court cannot go into the details of the material evidence to find out whether the evidence will be sufficient in establishing the guilt of the accused, as it is not a relevant consideration at this stage to ascertain the probability or improbability of the prosecution case as put forth. Hence, detailed examination of the material evidence and so also elaborate documents of merits is not desirable at this stage and it should be avoided while passing an order on bail petitions. Hence, detailed examination of the material evidence and so also elaborate documents of merits is not desirable at this stage and it should be avoided while passing an order on bail petitions. But in the present case on hand, though it is a successive bail petition filed by the accused, it is necessary in respect of the satisfaction about the prima facie case and not an exhaustive exploration of merits in the order itself. Therefore, it is said that what is necessary is the satisfaction about the prima facie case for which the I.O. has facilitated collection of materials in order to lay the charge-sheet against the accused. But in fact it is necessary to state that realism is a component of humanism which is the heart of the legal system. Further, the court shall not drag into minute details in an arena of speculation to suppress the material circumstances though at this stage the material evidence would not be considered in the sense of the terms. Therefore, it is said that there are substance in the contention of the counsel for the petitioners/accused for seeking the relief of bail by urging various grounds and also based upon the material evidence collected by the I.O. during the course of investigation. But in fact it is relevant to state that the material collected by the I.O. are enough material to lay the charge-sheet against the accused but not sufficient material to decline the relief of bail as sought for by them. Hence, at this stage, it does not require any detailed discussion while considering the bail petition filed by the accused. Therefore, for the aforesaid reasons as well as in the circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioners/accused deserve to be granted bail in respect of the present successive bail petition for the grounds urged. 7. However, learned HCGP submits that if the petitioners are supposed to be released on bail, certainly they would come in the way of prosecution case and destroy the evidence. This apprehension expressed by the learned HCGP could be curtailed by imposing certain suitable conditions to safeguard the interest of the prosecution. Therefore, for the aforesaid reasons as well as in the circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 3 deserve for bail. This apprehension expressed by the learned HCGP could be curtailed by imposing certain suitable conditions to safeguard the interest of the prosecution. Therefore, for the aforesaid reasons as well as in the circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 3 deserve for bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The petition filed by petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 3 in C.C.No.2581/2019 arising out of Cr.No.74/2019 of Vidyagiri P.S., Dharwad under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed. Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 3 shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions: i) Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 3 shall execute bond in a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) each, with a likesum surety each to the satisfaction of the committal court in C.C.No.2581/2019 arising out of Crime No.74/2019 of Vidyagiri Police Station, Dharwad; ii) Petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 3 shall not tamper or hamper the case of prosecution witnesses. iii) Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 3 shall appear before the court of law on all the dates of hearing without fail. iv) Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 shall not leave the jurisdiction of Dharwad District without prior permission from the competent court of law. v) Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 3 shall not indulge in any other criminal activities henceforth; If Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 3 violate any of the above conditions, the bail order shall automatically stand ceased.