Regular bail despite criminal antecedents where trial was nearly complete and continued custody was unnecessary.

Regular bail was granted where the petitioner's criminal antecedents were considered, but the Court held they could not by themselves justify refusal of bail. The relevant factors were the period of custody, the near-complete stage of trial, and the fact that only two formal witnesses remained out of forty-seven. Pendency of other cases was treated as a relevant circumstance, but the evidence in the present case had to be assessed independently. As the trial was at the fag end, continued incarceration was found unnecessary.

---

---

Issues: Whether regular bail should be granted when the petitioner has criminal antecedents but the trial is almost over.

Analysis: The Court considered the petitioner's custody period, the stage of the trial, and the fact that only two formal witnesses remained out of a total of forty-seven. It held that pendency of other cases may be a relevant factor, but bail cannot be denied solely on that basis when the evidence in the present case must be assessed independently. Since the trial was at the fag end, continued incarceration was found unnecessary.

Conclusion: Regular bail was granted to the petitioner.

---