As per case facts, Petitioner Kishore Kumar allegedly inflicted knife injuries on the informant's husband, Jatin, after demanding money while seemingly intoxicated. The informant witnessed the incident, and Jatin sustained ... injuries to his chest, neck, and leg. The petitioner sought regular bail, arguing that the investigation was complete, the charge sheet filed, he had roots in society, no alcohol was found in his blood (contradicting the intoxication claim), and DNA analysis on the knife was inconclusive. The respondent argued it was a heinous crime and the petitioner might abscond or intimidate witnesses. The question arose whether the petitioner should be granted bail, considering the nature of the accusation, severity of punishment, and potential for absconding or tampering with witnesses. Finally, the Court, applying principles from Supreme Court precedents, found a prima facie case against the petitioner for an offense punishable with life imprisonment. The Court noted that the non-recovery of a weapon or inconclusive DNA is not fatal to the prosecution's case, and the absence of alcohol in the petitioner's blood did not falsify the informant's opinion of his intoxication. Due to the severe nature of the punishment and the prima facie involvement, the petition for bail was dismissed.