ORDER :

1. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed under Section 439(2) read with 482 Cr.P.C. for cancellation of bail granted to the respondent nos. 2 and 3 by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.01.2013 passed in A.B.A. No. 264 of 2012 in connection with Dhanbad (Saraidhela) P.S. Case No. 924 of 2011 corresponding to G.R. No. 3766 of 2011 registered u/s 406, 420, 467, 468, 34 I.P.C.

Factual Background of the Case

2. As per F.I.R. informant has alleged that development agreement was entered into between the parties on 25.01.2020 and present accused persons (opposite party no. 2 and 3) being builders agreed to develop the land in the ration of 36%: 64%. It was also agreed that separate charge of distribution of flat/shops will be attached after mutual understanding between the parties, according to their shares. Accordingly, on 17.11.2010 an agreement was entered into between the opposite party no. 3 and one Akash Verma, Director of Pre-Stressed Udyog Limited and a chart was prepared whereby 17 flats were agreed to be given to the informant. The power of attorney was also given by the informant in favour of opposite party no. 3 on 26.06.2010. It is alleged that petitioners, in spite of aforesaid agreement, fraudulently and with malafide intention entered into agreement with Priyanka Agarwal and Hare Krishna Choudhary by depriving the informant from 36 % share, hence, this F.I.R.

3. After rejection of prayer for anticipatory bail by the Court of Sessions the opposite party nos. 2 and 3 had filed A.B.A. No. 264 of 2012 before the High Court and they were granted anticipatory bail with following conditions:

“I allow this anticipatory bail application and direct the petitioners to surrender in the court below on or before 18th of January 2013 and give a written undertaking in the court below that they will give possession of flat and car parking to the opposite party no. 2 immediately after the completion of building in question as mentioned in Annexure A to the supplementary affidavit dated 04.01.2013. If such writing undertaking is filed in the court below, then the learned court below is directed to enlarge petitioners on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in connection with Dhanbad (Saraidhela) P.S. Case No. 924 of 2011 corresponding to G.R. No. 3766 of 2011, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr. P.C.”

Arguments on behalf of the petitioner

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in compliance of impugned order of anticipatory bail, opposite party nos. 2 and 3 have filed required undertaking (annexure 3) dated 11.01.2013 before the court below and furnished the bail bond. It is further submitted that as a matter of fact in spite of conditional order of anticipatory bail and undertaking filed before the concerned trial court, terms and conditions were not complied with and not a single flat or parking space were provided to the petitioners/informant, rather they have sold all the 16 flats along with parking area to some other persons.

5. Petitioner is an old man of 84 years and could not be able to file an application earlier due to his illness and bad health. Meanwhile, son of the petitioner also died. Petitioner was compelled to institute a Complaint Case No. 2810 of 2019 before the learned CJM, Dhanbad against the opposite party nos. and 3 for the offence under Section 420, 467, 468, 120(B) I.P.C. and due to outbreak of Novel Corona 19, he was also affected hence, could not take proper steps.

6. Petitioner is seeking the door of this Hon’ble Court as a last hope and prays to direct opposite party nos. 2 and 3 to comply the terms of undertaking dated 11.01.2013 and also cancel the anticipatory bail of the petitioners earlier granted to the opposite party nos. 2 and 3, on account of deliberate violation of the condit