Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, the learned counsel representing first informant, upon perusal of material brought on record, evidence, complicity of the accused, accusation made, nature and gravity of offence and coupled with the fact that as per the confessional statement of co-accused the fatal assault on the head of the deceased was made by co-accused Bhole, the applicant is guilty of disposing of the dead body of the deceased, the police report i.e. charge-sheet under Section 173 (2) CrPC has already been submitted, therefore, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution stands crystallized, however in spite of above the learned A.G.A. nor the learned counsel for first informant could not point out any such circumstance except those mentioned above necessitating the custodial arrest of the applicant during the pendency of trial, the clean antecedents of the applicant inasmuch as he has no criminal history to his credit except the present one, the period of incarceration undergone, the present case is a case of circumstantial evidence, therefore, there is no eye-witness of the occurrence, no strong motive has emerged against the applicant for committing the crime in question, prima facie none of the parameters laid down in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda (supra) for deciding the guilt of an accused in a case based on circumstantial evidence is satisfied against the applicant upto this stage, but without making any comments on the merits of the case, the applicant has made out a case for bail.
