IMPORTANT POINT
Bail should not be cancelled without clear evidence of violation of conditions or misuse of liberty, as established by the court's analysis.

ORDER :

1. The petitioner is knocking at the doors of this Court calling in question an order dated 07-03-2024 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I, Davangere in Special Case No. 714 of 2023 cancelling the bail order dated 31-08-2023 granted in his favour.

2. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows:

A complaint comes to be filed before the Harihar Town Police Station against the petitioner and another Vasudev Hiremat alleging to have indulged in offences punishable under the IPC and Protection of Children from Sexual Offices Act, 2012 (‘the Act’ for short) on the daughter of the complainant. Pursuant thereto. crime is registered in Crime No. 146 of 2023 arraigning the petitioner as accused No. 2 for offences punishable under Sections 363, 376 (2)(n), 506 of the IPC r/w Sections 4 and 6 of the Act. The petitioner moves an application before the concerned Court for grant of regular bail as he was taken into custody. On 03-10-2023 the Harihar Town Police lay a charge sheet in Crime No. 146 of 2023 against the petitioner and another. The petitioner is arraigned as accused No. 2 for different offences. Against the petitioner what was alleged was offence punishable under Sections 363, 506, 114 of the IPC r/w Section 17 of the Act. It was, therefore, kidnapping and abetment of commission of the offence against the petitioner, while against accused No. 1 all the offences are alleged.

3. The crux of the charge against the petitioner was that accused No. 1 is known to the family of the complainant. On 13-06-2020 accused No. 1 kidnapped the daughter of the complainant and committed sexual assault. This goes on for a long time. Every time sexual assault happened against the daughter of the complainant, accused No. 1 used to come in the Scorpio vehicle along with the petitioner and take the victim. This was the gist of the complaint. The petitioner was not alleged of commission of rape under Section 376 (2)(n) of the IPC or Sections 4 and 6 of the Act. The allegation against him is abetment to the said offence and kidnapping. The petitioner was, on the said ground, enlarged on bail by an order of the concerned Court on certain conditions. Alleging that the conditions have been violated, the prosecution moves an application before the concerned Court seeking cancellation of bail under sub-section (2) of Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. The concerned Court cancels the bail in terms of its order dated 07-03-2024. It is, therefore, the petitioner is before this Court in the subject petition.

4. Heard Sri Basavaraj R. Bannur, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri B.N. Jagadeesh, learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would vehemently contend that bail once granted could not have been cancelled, on the ground on which it is cancelled that the petitioner involved in other two cases, in violation of conditions of bail. The further allegation is that the petitioner has threatened the witnesses. Both these grounds, on which the bail is cancelled is contrary to law is his submission. He would submit that all the three crimes are registered by the very same complainant at different Police Stations. The moment the petitioner sought and got bail in Crime No. 146 of 2023, a crime is registered for offences punishable under Sections 504 and 506 of the IPC. Since they were non- cognizable offences, another crime comes to be registered in Crime No. 188 of 2023. The learned counsel would submit that deliberately to get the bail cancelled the said crime is registered against the petitioner.

6. Per contra, the learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor, refuting the submissions of the petitioner, would contend that the petitioner has also indulged in horrendous acts. He has assisted accused No. 1 in kidnapping the girl not once but on many occasions and abetted the crime of rape on a minor. Bail was granted to him, but he came out and started to