JUDGMENT R. Raghunandan Rao, J. - The petitioner is accused No.4 in Crime No.159 of 2022 of I Town Police Station, Kakinada District for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 302, 201, 109 read with Section 34 IPC. He was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 16.09.2022 and has remained in judicial custody since then. The present application has been filed for grant of bail. 2. The allegations in the complaint against the petitioner herein are: A.1 had developed close intimacy with A.2 and A.3 separately. On the advice of A.3, A.1 is said to have decided to kill her husband. For this purpose, A.1 started administering three or four sleeping pills to the deceased husband every night by mixing them in the meals or tiffin consumed by the deceased husband. These sleeping pills were supplied by A.3. Later A.2 is said to have asked A.1 to increase the number of sleeping pills that she was mixing in the meals of the deceased. About one week prior to the demise of the deceased husband, A.3 is said to have supplied a chloroform bottle to A.1. On 22.06.2022, A.1 and A.2 together applied chloroform to the deceased husband and thereby killed the deceased husband. A.3 is said to have, then, come to the house of A.1 and disposed of the Namaz cap and chloroform bottle which were used to apply chloroform to the deceased husband. 3. Later A.1 pretended to wake up the deceased-husband and informed everybody that the deceased husband had died. Later, on certain suspicions, a complaint appears to have been lodged with the police on account of which a case in Crime No.159 of 2022 was registered under Section 174 Cr.P.C. In the course of investigation, the provision of law was altered into Section 302 read with 34 IPC and subsequently Section 120B and 201 IPC were also added. 4. A.1 to A.3 were arrested on 22.08.2022 and sent to judicial custody. Police custody of the accused was obtained and in the course of interrogation A.1 further confessed that three months prior to the murder of her husband, she had come into contact with A.4/the petitioner herein, who was a Doctor running a nursing home. A.1 stated that the petitioner herein had agreed to assist A.1 in killing her husband, if she fulfills his sexual desire. A.1 stated that the petitioner herein had agreed to assist A.1 in killing her husband, if she fulfills his sexual desire. Thereafter, she started taking the advice of the petitioner about the manner in which sleeping pills are to be given to her husband. The petitioner is said to have verified the tablets being administered to the husband and had advised A.1 to use the tablets manufactured by another company as the said tablets were more effective. The new tablets were said to have been supplied by the petitioner to A.1 through A.2. A.2 is also said to have admitted that he had collected sleeping tablets from the petitioner and handed them over to A.1. 5. Sri K.S. Murthy, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri V.V.N. Narasimham, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the petitioner has been in judicial custody for about 96 days and was unable to obtain statutory bail as a preliminary charge sheet was filed specifically to ensure that statutory bail is not available to the petitioner. He would further submit that the cause of death, even according to the prosecution, is administering of chloroform and that the death did not occur due to consumption of sleeping tablets. He would submit that the investigation is effectively completed, as a preliminary charge sheet has already been filed, and nothing further survives for investigation requiring incarceration of the petitioner. He would further submit that the petitioner is a respectable Doctor, who has been running a nursing home for the past few decades and there is no danger of the petitioner either affecting the investigation or running away. He would further submit that the petitioner suffers from diabetes, hypertension and prostate enlargement which require regular treatment and the same would not be available to the petitioner in jail. 6. Sri K.S. Murthy, learned Senior Counsel would also submit that except the confessional statement of accused Nos.1 and 3, there is no material to link the petitioner to the present set of offences. In the circumstances, the learned Senior Counsel would urge that the petitioner would be entitled to be released on bail. The learned Senior Counsel would also assure the Court that the petitioner would cooperate with the investigation, if any further investigation is left. 7. In the circumstances, the learned Senior Counsel would urge that the petitioner would be entitled to be released on bail. The learned Senior Counsel would also assure the Court that the petitioner would cooperate with the investigation, if any further investigation is left. 7. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that further investigation is still continuing and it cannot be said that the investigation has been completed. He would submit that certain voice samples have been taken from the other accused for sending them to the Forensic Science Laboratory for testing and comparison. He would further submit that since the investigation has not yet been completed and the role of the petitioner is still under investigation, it would not be appropriate to permit the petitioner to be released on bail as there is every possibility of the petitioner interfering in the investigation. 8. It is clear that the investigation has not yet been completed. The present case is a case falling under Section 302 IPC, and as such, extreme caution would have to be observed by the Court while considering an application for bail. Since the investigation is still being carried out in the case, it would not be appropriate to permit the petitioner to be released on bail. Accordingly, this criminal petition is dismissed. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.