Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case is based on circumstantial evidence and by now the father of the deceased and the independent witnesses being examined in the trial; the independent witnesses have not supported the prosecution case. He further submits that the FIR version as presented is not acceptable as would be clear when read with the statements of the other witnesses. He submits that only on recovery of the dead body of the deceased, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and as such he is in custody since 29.03.2017. He further submits that when the father of the deceased and the villagers cited as the witnesses from the side of the prosecution have already been examined, at this stage there remains no scope on the part of the petitioner to tamper the evidence. According to him, the petitioner being the permanent resident of the district of Angul, there remains least scope on his part to flee from justice. In view of all the above, he urges that further detention of the petitioner till conclusion of the trial would not be in the interest of justice.
