Petitioner is the de facto complainant in Crime No.868/2011 of Kuruppampady Police Station registered for the offence punishable under Section 498A IPC. She has filed the above petition for cancellation of the bail granted to the first respondent (first accused) in the above crime, by Annexure A order dated 7.9.2011 by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Perumbavoor. First respondent had violated the conditions on which bail was granted by the Magistrate is the case of petitioner for cancellation of his bail, under Section 439(2) read with Section 482 Cr.P.C.

2. The above petition came up for consideration with another petition, an application for bail moved by the first respondent (B.A.3663/2013) in another crime in which he is proceeded as one among the accused. Though arguments were addressed by the respective counsel in both petitions in common the petitions have to be disposed separately since different yardsticks apply in the matter of grant of a bail and of revoking bail already granted.

3. The present petition has been filed to cancel bail granted to the first respondent proceeded as an accused in a crime registered at the instance of the de facto complainant. Petitioner/de facto complainant is the wife of first respondent. Her complaints imputing of matrimonial cruelty by her husband and his close relatives has led to the registration of the above crime for the offence under section 498A IPC. In that crime, it is seen from Annexure A order, after negativing the objections raised by her, which was so done filing an application setting forth the grounds thereof, Magistrate granted bail to the first respondent (first accused) in the crime subject to some conditions. Among other conditions imposed for release of first respondent on bail it was ordered that he should not commit any offence while on bail. First respondent subsequently got involved in another crime while continuing on bail enjoyed under Annexure A order is the crux of petitioner's case to seek for cancellation of his bail. He is involved as an accused in another sessions case, the incident of which occurred even prior to the registration of the crime at the instance of de facto complainant, with the circumstances surrounding that case as well, and, that of the subsequent crime registered against him after his release on bail under Annexure A order are banked upon by petitioner to set forth a case that bail granted to first respondent under Annexure A order has to be cancelled.

4. After hearing the counsel on both sides at length and looking into Annexure A order, I find whatever circumstances surrounding the sessions case in which the first accused is proceeded as an accused had been urged by the petitioner against granting the first respondent bail and after considering the merit of such objections the Magistrate had granted him bail. Whether the first respondent getting involved in another crime as an accused, after getting bail under Annexure-1 order, as such would tantamount to violation of one or other condition imposed for his bail by Magistrate has to be considered. The second crime was registered over an incident which occurred in the court hall of Family Court, Ernakulam. Admittedly, the relationship of de facto complainant and her husband (first respondent) is too bitter and it has given rise to civil and criminal cases. First respondent has filed a petition for divorce, which is stated to be pending consideration. Over the custody of a child born out of the wedlock of the spouses interim orders passed are in force, and on the day fixed for handing over the custody of child to the first respondent (father) he came to the family court with his sister and mother. That day the incident giving rise to the second crime occurred in which the father of de facto complainant is alleged to have been assaulted by the first respondent and his sister. Further allegation is that first respondent has stabbed him with a pen knife and caused him severe injuri