BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J.

( 1 ) IN this case, the petitioner had been granted bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge by an order dated 23. 02. 2005. Upon going through that order, it appears that one of the circumstances under which the petitioner had been directed to be released on bail was that the petitioner was considered to be of 75 years of age. This would be clear from the operative portion of the order dated 23. 02. 2005 which reads as under:- â Considering all the circumstances though the offence is very serious, I direct the applicant be released on bail on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties in the like amount as she is a lady of the age of 75 years under Section 437 Cr. P. C.

( 2 ) THEREAFTER an application under Section 439 (2) Cr. P. C. for cancellation of bail was moved on behalf of the State. The application was moved for cancellation of bail on two grounds. Firstly, it was alleged that the age of the petitioner was not 75 years and that the petitioner had wrongly mentioned her age as 75 years. According to them her age is about 65 years and that is what is being maintained by the prosecution even today. The second ground taken

Click Here to Read the rest of this document