An anticipatory bail order can be canceled if it is obtained by concealing material facts, misrepresenting the court, failing to comply with the conditions imposed by the court, or if the accused has a history of criminal offenses.

1. - The complainant-petitioner has filed this application under Section 439 (2) Cr.P.C. with a prayer to cancel anticipatory bail granted to the accused-respondents by the Sessions Judge, Jaipur Metropolitan vide order dated 20.05.2011 passed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2514/2011 in respect of FIR No.170/2010 registered at Police Station Shyam Nagar, Jaipur City (South) for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120B IPC.

2. Brief relevant facts for the disposal of this application may be stated as below:-

(1) The petitioner filed a written report for the aforesaid offences before Police Station Shyam Nagar, Jaipur on 21.05.2010 with the averment that in the year 1987 he purchased Plots No.18 and 19 in Patel Nagar, Ajmer Road, Jaipur from the Anand Bhawan Housing Cooperative Society Limited, Jaipur through respondent Shri Hanuman Sahay Bagda and a receipt alongwith the allotment letter (Patta) was issued to him and on 08.08.2009 when he visited the site where the aforesaid plots are situated he found some another person in occupation of the same. It was further avered that in the presence of persons named in the report he personally contacted the respondent Shri Hanuman Sahay. he assured him that in lieu of the aforesaid plots he will be allotted plots bearing Nos.99 and 100 on the condition that original Patta and the receipt of the aforesaid plots may be handed over to him and believing the assurance given by the respondent he handed over the original Patta and receipt to the respondent but neither new plots were allotted nor original documents returned to him. It was averred that the respondent Shri Hanuman Sahay dishonestly and by making fraudulent representation induced the petitioner to deliver the original documents of the aforesaid plots and thereby cheated him. On the basis of this written statement, FIR No.170/2010 was registered at Police Station Shyam Nagar, Jaipur for the aforesaid offences and investigation commenced.

(2) During the course of investigation apprehending their arrest the respondents filed Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2541/2011 under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail before the Sessions Judge, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur and the same was allowed by the learned Court vide impugned order dated 20.05.2011.

(3) Feeling aggrieved with the order of anticipatory bail granted to the respondents, the complainant-petitioner has filed this application for cancellation of bail under Section 439 (2) Cr.P.C. on 03.08.2011. It is to be noted that the State Government also filed Application for Cancellation of Ball bearing No.4401/2011 against the aforesaid order before the learned Sessions Judge, but the same was dismissed vide order dated 17.08.2012 without going into the merit only by the reason that the petitioner has already filed the present application for cancellation of the same order and the same is still pending. In that application apart from other grounds. It was stated that the respondents have not complied the conditions imposed by the Court and they have not filed the requisite bail bonds. It was also stated that despite issuance of several notices, the respondents have failed to appear before the investigating officer and they are not cooperating with the investigation.

(4) During the course of investigation, necessary evidence was collected by the investigating agency and It was found that apart from respondents one Shri Gajendra Sharma @ Rajendra and Ramesh Kumar @ Kumar @ Ranu are also involved in the incident and all of them are guilty of the charges leveled against them. During investigation accused-Shri Ramesh Kumar @ Ranu was arrested and after investigation charge-sheet No.403/2910 for the offences under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120B IPC was filed against him in the competent Court while investigation against responde -its and one Shri Gajendra was kept pending under Section 1