Anticipatory bail cannot be cancelled without substantial evidence of wrongdoing or interference with the investigation.

ORDER :

1. Heard the parties.

2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to the opposite party No. 2 in terms of the order dated 12.01.2022 passed in A.B.A. No. 26 of 2022 in connection with Thakurgangti P.S. Case No. 45 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 456/342/376 of the Indian Penal Code, now pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Godda.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the opposite party No. 2 is that he committed rape upon the petitioner. It is submitted that the anticipatory bail was granted to the opposite party No. 2 inter alia because the opposite party No. 2 who was the petitioner in A.B.A. No. 26 of 2022 filed the copy of the certified copy of the joint compromise petition filed by the parties in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Godda. It is next submitted that because of threatening to the petitioner due to fear, the petitioner put her thumb impression in the compromise petition dated 16.09.2022. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as prayed for in this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition be allowed.

4. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer of the petitioner to cancel the bail granted to the opposite party No. 2 and submit that there is no allegation against the petitioner of tampering with the evidence or threatening any witnesses. It is next submitted that the contention of the petitioner is that she put her thumb impression under duress; is out and out false because not only the informant but also her advocate has also signed the petition filed by the petitioner and there is no material available in the record to suggest that the advocate was ever put under pressure by anybody. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer made in this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition be rejected.

5. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that it is a settled principle of law that the grounds illustratively though not exhaustively; for which bail granted to an accused can be cancelled, are as under:

(i) by indulging in similar criminal activity.

(ii) interfering with the course of investigation.

(iii) attempted to tamper with evidence or witnesses.

(iv) threaten witnesses or indulges in similar activities which would hamper smooth investigation.

(v) there is likelihood of their fleeing to another country.

(vi) attempted to make themselves scarce by going underground or becoming unavailable to the investigating agency.

(vii) attempted to place themselves beyond the reach of their surety, etc.

6. It is pertinent to mention here that there is no allegation against the opposite party No. 2 that the opposite party No. 2 after being admitted to bail has either indulged in similar criminal activity or intention to interfere with the course of investigation or attempted to tamper with the evidence nor he has alleged to have committed any of the offence for which bail granted to an accused can be cancelled. Hence, this court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the bail granted to the opposite party No. 2 in terms of the order dated 12.01.2022 passed in A.B.A. No. 26 of 2022 in connection with Thakurgangti P.S. Case No. 45 of 2021 be cancelled.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, being without any merit, is dismissed.