1. The petitioner seeks enlargement on regular bail in FIR No. 69/2018, dated 12.04.2018, registered at Police Station Sadar, Jhalawar, District Jhalawar, for an offence under Section 302, 120-B IPC.
2. The above-stated FIR has been lodged on a complaint made by Mahadev Meena, who has alleged, inter alia, that his son - Chetan Prakash got married with Anita Meena on 21.01.2011. He was, thereafter, selected as Assistance Intelligence Officer in the Intelligence Bureau. Anita was working as a second grade teacher, at that time, and later on, she got appointment as First Grade Lecturer in a Senior Secondary School. He further alleged that the petitioner (Praveen Rathore) was also working as an Officer in the Intelligence Bureau. He came in close contact to his daughter-inlaw (Anita Meena) and when his son - Chetan Prakash objected to it, the petitioner threatened him with dire consequences. The complainant's son was found unconscious near railway culvert on 14.02.2018 and was declared as dead when he was taken to the hospital. His nails of hands and legs were found to be blue.
3. As per the FSL Report, the cause of death was a drug Ketamine, which was injected to the deceased.
4. The co-accused Shahrukh Khan, who was arrested on 19.06.2018, also revealed that the deceased was injected with drug Ketamine. The petitioner was arrested on 18.08.2018. He was released on bail by the High Court on 12.02.2021. The said bail order was challenged by the complainant before this Court. Criminal Appeal No. 1089/2021 @ SLP(Crl.) No. 4072 of 2021, preferred by the complainant, was allowed by this Court on 27.09.2021, and the order of granting bail to the petitioner was set aside. He was, thus, again taken into custody. The petitioner, thereafter, again applied for his release on bail but the same stands declined by the Trial Court as well as the High Court vide the impugned order dated 31.03.2023.
5. It is not in dispute that the petitioner, by now, has undergone more than four and a half years' of sentence. The prosecution intends to examine 76 witnesses, out of whom 53 have already deposed. All the crucial witnesses have already been examined. The instant case was adjourned on few occasions to enable the prosecution to examine Chauthmal Kashyap and Manohar Rathore, who were stated to be the vital witnesses. Their deposition is also complete.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the material placed on record.
7. Taking into consideration the period already spent by the petitioner in custody coupled with the fact that conclusion of trial will take some reasonable time however, without expressing any views on the merits of the case, we are inclined to release him on bail.
8. The petitioner is, accordingly, directed to be enlarged on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
9. The petitioner shall remain present before the Trial Court regularly on each and every date of hearing. Any attempt made by the petitioner to influence the witnesses, who are yet to depose, or try to tamper with the evidence, will be a sufficient ground for the complainant or the State to seek cancellation of bail granted to the petitioner herein by moving an appropriate application under Section 439(2) Cr. P.C.
10. The Trial Court shall make an endeavour to conclude the trial at the earliest. The parties are directed to cooperate with the Trial Court in this regard.
11. The Special Leave Petition stands disposed of accordingly.
12. As a result, pending interlocutory application also stands disposed of.