Cancellation of bail requires cogent and overwhelming circumstances, and the balance between an individual's liberty and the interest of society must be considered.

S.P. GARG, J.

1. Present petition under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the victim – Davinder Singh Dawer for cancellation of bail granted to respondent No.2 vide order dated 25.05.2006. The petition is contested by the respondent No.2 (hereinafter referred as ‘accused’).

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. Admitted position is that the accused is facing trial in case FIR No.513/2005 registered under Sections 307/120B/353/186 IPC and Section 25 Arms Act at PS Pahar Ganj. By an order dated 25.05.2006, the accused was granted regular bail by this Court in Bail Application No. 871/2006. The accused was directed not to leave India without prior permission of the concerned Trial Court; he shall not attempt to tamper with the evidence or influence any of the witnesses directly or indirectly. Undisputedly, the prosecution has examined all its witnesses. At one stage, the Trial Court had dispensed with the recording of the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. qua the accused. However, in Crl.Rev.P. 576/2009 filed by the victim, this Court by an order dated 19.09.2014 directed the Trial Court to record statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. SLP (Crl.) No.8534/2014 preferred by the accused against the said order was finally dismissed by an order dated 24.09.2015 (Annexure P-5). In response filed by the accused to the instant petition, it is informed that 313 statement of the accused has since been recorded. On 02.05.2016, the petitioner has moved the Trial Court for re-examination of co-accused Arshad Khan.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that way back in 2005 the accused had sent threatening message to the complainant on his mobile. SMS received on 04.07.2005 at 08.00 p.m. read as “Marne Par Hamein Janat Mile Na Mile, Ye Hava Ye Fiza Mile Na Mile, SMS Karne Me Kasar Mat Kariye Mere Dost Maloom Nahin Upar Ja Kar Mobile Mile Na Mile”. A complaint dated 07.07.2005 was lodged at PS Pahar Ganj. Learned counsel further urged that the accused along with his associates made a false complaint on 18.06.2015 through SMS from Mobile No. +91-9599022393 and also from +91-9855756987 to the custom officials at Air Cargo Complex, New Delhi that the petitioner was exporting narcotics through the export shipment under the AWB No.250-1260-0641. In view of the false complaint, customs officials stopped the export consignment on 18.06.2015 at midnight despite its previous clearance. Subsequently, this complaint was found false; no narcotics / contraband was found in the said shipment. On verification, it transpired that the said SMS was sent by one Mr. Sareen, a close friend of the accused. Apparently, the accused had attempted to falsely implicate the petitioner / victim in a false case in an attempt to harass, intimidate and pressurize him. It violated the terms and conditions of the bail order dated 25.05.2006.

4. Learned counsel further urged that the accused had also made a false complaint to the Chief Minister of Delhi and various other Government agencies in respect of alleged unauthorized construction on 24.06.2015. He also filed a Writ Petition (Civil) No.6931/2015 before this Court against North Delhi Municipal Corporation and others, wherein Himanshu Dawer, petitioner’s nephew was arrayed as respondent No.3. The said writ petition was filed in respect of the alleged unauthorized construction being carried out in property bearing No.2325-26, Chuna Mandi, Tilak Gali, Pahar Ganj, New Delhi by Himanshu Dawer. Counsel submitted that it was the accused who had made the complaint in respect of the alleged unauthorised construction with North Delhi Municipal Corporation consequent to which the said Corporation booked the said property and issued Show Cause Notice and Demolition Order. The said order was challenged before the Appellate Tribunal MCD (ATMCD) by filing an appeal under Section 343(2) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957. Specific observation was made