Bail granted to murder accused whose alleged role was limited and from whom nothing was recovered.

The petitioner, accused No. 2 and the mother of accused No. 1, sought regular bail in a case arising from the death of Ankitha.

The prosecution alleged that accused No. 1 strangled the deceased and that the petitioner restrained her hands and legs; accused Nos. 3 and 4 were alleged to have assisted in disposing of the body.

The complaint was lodged approximately three months after the incident.

The petitioner contended that she was falsely implicated, that no material had been recovered from her, and that the allegation against her was limited to restraining the deceased.

The State opposed bail on grounds including the seriousness of the offence and the risk of witness tampering.

The petitioner sought bail in the pending Sessions case.

1. Whether the petitioner, accused No. 2, was entitled to regular bail in the circumstances of the case

2. Whether concerns regarding the gravity of the alleged offence and possible interference with the trial warranted refusal of bail

The petition was brought under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which empowers the High Court or Court of Session to grant bail.

The offences alleged included Sections 103, 238, 3(5), 61(1) and 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

In deciding bail, the Court considered the nature and gravity of the allegations, the severity of punishment, the possibility of absconding, witness tampering, the petitioner’s character and antecedents, and the imposition of appropriate conditions.

No precedent was cited.

The Court noted that the allegation against the petitioner was that she assisted accused No. 1 by holding the deceased’s hands and legs, while accused Nos. 3 and 4, alleged to have assisted with disposal of the body, had already been granted bail.

The post-mortem report did not establish the cause of death because of decomposition, and nothing had been recovered at the petitioner’s instance.

Having considered these circumstances alongside the relevant bail factors, the Court concluded that the petitioner could be released subject to conditions addressing risks to the prosecution and investigation.

The conditions required her not to threaten or tamper with prosecution witnesses, to cooperate with the Investigating Officer until completion of the investigation, and not to involve herself in similar offences; breach could be grounds for seeking cancellation of bail.