As per case facts, Petitioners/Accused Number 8, 35, and 36 were implicated in large-scale irregularities concerning excise policy and APSBCL functioning, managing kickbacks and illicit fund movement for vote buying ... in elections, leading to the registration of a crime. The petitioners sought regular bail, arguing that investigation was substantially complete, charge sheets filed, and they had endured prolonged custody without specific incriminating evidence, also citing parity with co-accused granted bail. The question arose whether the Petitioners were entitled to regular bail, considering the gravity of economic offenses, investigation stage, prolonged pre-trial detention, and parity. Finally, the Court granted bail to all petitioners under strict conditions. It noted the investigation's substantial completion, charge sheets filed, lack of material indicating abscondence or tampering, and their prolonged custody. The Court emphasized that bail is the rule and jail the exception, and further incarceration was unwarranted, acknowledging that prolonged pre-trial detention can infringe personal liberty, especially with trial delays.