ORDER : 1. Petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. 2. F.I.R. No. 282/2022 was registered at Police Station Kunhadi, District Kota City for offences under Sections 302 & 201 of IPC. Later on, police filed charge-sheet for offences under Sections 302, 201, 397, 364 411 & 414 of IPC. 3. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He contends that entire prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence. He further contends that recoveries of ornaments and Aadhar Card of the deceased have been made at the instance of petitioner but no identification memo of those ornaments was prepared by the investigation agency while husband and son of deceased were examined under Section 161 Cr.P.C. He also submits that there was no reason for the petitioner to have kept the Aadhar Card of the deceased with him for nearly five months, which in fact is useless for the petitioner. He thus, urges that the recovery of Aadhar Card and ornaments have been planted upon the petitioner. He further submits that there is no motive for the petitioner to commit the alleged crime and chain of circumstances are not clearly indicating towards guilt of the petitioner. He further submits that petitioner is in custody since 25.11.2022. Charge- sheet has been filed and trial is likely to consume time. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and submits that ornaments and Aadhar Card of the deceased have been recovered at the instance of the petitioner but he fairly concedes that no identification memo of the ornaments of the deceased, recovered at the instance of petitioner, has been prepared. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both the parties, period of custody and the fact that petitioner has been arrested in this matter after 5 months of the incident solely on the basis that tower location of the mobile phones of deceased and petitioner was same, but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of this case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 7. 7. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused petitioner-Pramod Kumar Singh @ Tonu S/o Shri Dan Singh shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.