Regular bail in murder allegations may follow where no overt act is attributed, investigation is complete, and trial is delayed.

Regular bail under Section 439 CrPC was considered in a murder case where the applicant's name appeared in the FIR, but a later complainant statement did not attribute any specific overt act to him. The Court treated that later statement as materially different from the earlier version and, without examining the merits in detail at the bail stage, relied on the applicant's continued custody, completion of investigation, filing of the charge-sheet and the likelihood of trial delay due to a large number of witnesses. On those factors, discretion was exercised in favour of bail.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant, accused in a murder case, was entitled to regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in view of the allegations, subsequent statements, custody, filing of charge-sheet and likely delay in trial.

Analysis: The applicant's name appeared in the FIR, but the subsequent statement of the complainant recorded after about 25 days did not attribute any overt act to him, though his presence was mentioned. The Court noted that the later statement materially altered the earlier version, and, at the bail stage, it was not entering into the merits in detail. The Court also considered that the applicant was in jail since 9th May 2020, investigation was over and charge-sheet had been filed, and the trial was likely to take time as more than 110 witnesses were to be examined. On these factors, the Court found it fit to exercise discretion in favour of bail.

Conclusion: The applicant was held entitled to regular bail.

Ratio Decidendi: At the stage of regular bail, custody, completion of investigation, delay in trial and the absence of a specific overt act in the later statement can justify release on bail despite grave allegations, if the Court finds a prima facie case for exercise of discretion.

---