Court No. - 22
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 2165 of 2018 Applicant :- Bhagwant Prasad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Adeel Ahmad Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA, and perused the record.
This bail cancellation application has been moved by the applicant/complainant to cancel bail granted vide order dated 22.12.2017 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, Maharajganj in Bail Application No. 1525 of 2017, Special Session Trial No. 351/2016 in pursuance of Case Crime No. 118 of 2016 under Sections 323, 325, 504, 452, 427 IPC and 3(1)(10) SC/ST Act, Police Station Kothibhar, District Maharajganj whereby accused Rohit @ Ajeet/opposite party no.2 was enlarged on bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant/complainant submitted that there were several injuries received by injured Maina Devi and fracture was found in 5th metacarpal bone and bail was wrongly granted on the ground of parity. It is also submitted that accused/opposite party no.2 is involved in Case Crime No. 59 of 2016 under Section 366, 302, 201, 120-B, 34 IPC and 3(2)5 SC/ST Act, Police Station Kothibhar, District Maharajganj.
In the case of Shahzad Hasan Khan v. Ishtiq, AIR 1987 SC 1613, the Apex Court has held that in the absence of sufficient materials to show that the accused was threatening the informant, bail granted cannot be cancelled. The order under this section may be passed on the following grounds:-
"1. When the accused is found tampering with the evidence either during the investigation or during the trial.
2. When the persons on bail commits similar offence or any heinous offence during the period of bail.
3. When the accused has absconded and trial of the case gets delayed on that account.
4. When the offence so committed by the accused had created serious law and order problem in the society and accused had become a hazard on the peaceful living of the people.
5. If the High Court finds that the lower Court granting bail has exercised its judicial power wrongly.
6. If the High Court of Sessions Courts find that the accused has misused the privilege of bail.
7. If the life of the accused itself be in danger.
Ground shown in the application are not sufficient to cancel the bail granted to accused/opposite party No.2.
Moreover, in view of law laid down in the case of Abdul Basit @ Raju and others vs. Mohd. Abdul Kadir Chaudhary and another (2014) 10 SCC 754, this application would lie before the Court of Session Judge, not before the High Court, hence application is dismissed with liberty to file fresh bail cancellation application before the trial Court and if he files bail cancellation application, it is expected from the trial Court to decide the same on merit in accordance with law expeditiously.
Certify this judgment to the lower court immediately.
Order Date :- 27.2.2018/P.P.