JUDGMENT Deepak Kumar Agarwal, J. - This first criminal appeal has been preferred under Section 14-A-2 of the S.C. S.T. Act against the impugned order dated 10.08.2022 passed by Special Judge (under the Act), Bhind whereby appellant's application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been rejected. 2. The appellant has been arrested on 20.01.2022 in connection with Crime No.8/2022 registered at Police Station- Ron, District- Bhind (M.P.) in relation to the offence punishable under Sections 304(2), 34, 201, 120-B of IPC, 49 (A), 34(1)(Ka) of Excise Act and Sections 3(2) (v) of S.C.S.T. Act, 3. In brief, prosecution case is that on 15.1.2022 at about 7.12 am deceased Manish, Ravi @ Chotu Jatav, Ramdas Jatav due to taking illicit liquor died on the spot. During treatment merg 1/22, 2/22 and 3/22 were recorded. Dead body panchanama was prepared. Dead body was sent for medical examination. As per postmortem report, the cause of death could not be ascertained. The doctor advised for chemical analysis of visra. As per chemical report Ethyl and 4. Methanol alcohol were found but no poisonous substance was found. After investigation, charge sheet has been submitted. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant/accused made submission that statements of all the material witnesses namely Mewaram (PW/1), Kalyan (PW/2), Lalaram (PW/3), Rakesh (PW/4), Naresh (PW/5), Manu Katare (PW/6), Vinod (PW/7), Vikas (PW/8), Ajay Singh (PW/9) Vipin (PW/10), Dr. Hemant Shivhare (PW/11) have been recorded. They have not supported the prosecution case. It is further submitted that Narendra Jatav (PW/5) is the father of deceased Manish and Ravi. Appellant is in custody since 20.01.2022 and he is the permanent resident of District- Bhind (M.P.). There is no likelihood of his absconsion or tampering with the evidence. The appellant is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Court. With the aforesaid submissions, prayer for grant of bail is made. 6. Learned counsel for the State opposed the appeal and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out. 7. Heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. 6. Learned counsel for the State opposed the appeal and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out. 7. Heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. Looking to aforesaid changed circumstances that material witnesses have b e e n examined and appellant is in custody since 20.01.2022, without commenting on the merits of the case, the present appeal is allowed and order dated 10.08.2022 is set-aside and it is directed that if appellant furnish cash surety of Rs.25,000/- alongwith a personal bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, he should be released on bail. 9. He will present during trial before the trial Court on each and every date. 10. In case of any default, aforesaid cash security shall be forfeited without giving any notice. 11. This criminal appeal stands disposed of in above terms. 12. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for information. Certified copy/ e-copy as per rules/directions.