as complicity of applicant coupled with the fact that similarly situate and circumstanced co-accused Villu @ Rajnesh has already been enlarged on bail by this Court, the learned A.G.A. could not distinguish the case of present applicant from that of bailed out coaccused so as to deny him bail, no such incriminating circumstance could be pointed out by learned the A.G.A. necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the pendency of trial, the applicant being a lady itherefore she is entitled to the benefit of the provisions contained in proviso to section 437 Cr.P.C. the clean antecedents of applicant, the period of incarceration undergone, The police report in terms of Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted therefore the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stand crysttalised, in spite of above, the learned AG.A. could not point out any such circumstance from the record necessitating the custodial arrest of the applicant during the pendency of trial, therefore irrespective of the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in oppostition to present application for bail but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail.
