Anticipatory bail cannot be cancelled solely for non-compliance with mediation compromise terms like cheque dishonour, absent bail condition violation or liberty misuse; mediation communications confidential and inadmissible per Mediation Act.

JUDGMENT :

ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

1. Heard the parties.

2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with the prayer to quash the order dated 29.09.2022, passed by the Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 212 of 2018, whereby and whereunder the learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi has cancelled the anticipatory bail granted by it to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner who is an accused person of Argora P.S. Case No. 133 of 2017 has violated the condition on the basis of which anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner.

3. The brief fact of the case is that the petitioner was granted the anticipatory bail vide order dated 16.05.2028 passed in A.B.P. No. 1514 of 2017 in connection with Argora P.S. Case No. 133 of 2017 by learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi considering the proposal of the petitioner.

4. Perusal of the order dated 16.05.2018 whereby the petitioner was granted the anticipatory bail in the said A.B.P. No. 1514 of 2017 reveals that the learned Judicial Commissioner perused the agreement arrived at between the parties in the Mediation Centre, Ranchi and from the same it appeared to the learned Judicial Commissioner that both sides have entered into an agreement out of their own free will and accord and there is no liability against the petitioner and granted the anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Consequent upon granting of anticipatory bail, the petitioner appeared before the learned trial court and furnished bail bond in terms of the order dated 16.05.2018 passed by the learned Judicial Commissioner in A.B.P. No. 1514 of 2017.

6. On 29.09.2022 the opposite party filed an application for cancellation of the bail on the ground that five post dated cheques issued by the petitioner herein to the informant of the case got dishonoured and the said cheques were issued in terms of the compromise and considering that the amount of five cheques dishonoured were in total of Rupees 50 lakhs, the learned Judicial Commissioner cancelled the bail granted to the petitioner.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Diksha Kumari vs. State of Jharkhand and Another , (2024) SCC Online Jhar 1455 in which case this Court relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Pritpal Singh vs. State of Bihar , (2001) SCC Online SC 123 paragraphs 4 and 5 of which read as under:

"4. The dispute raised in the case relates to eviction of the appellant who is the tenant from the premises of which the respondent is the owner. Previously, there was a compromise between the parties in which it was agreed inter alia that the appellant will pay certain amount to the respondent and vacate the premises by the time stipulated. On the allegation that the appellant has failed to comply with the terms of the compromise by not vacating the premises in question within the time stipulated, the petition for cancellation of bail was filed. It is stated by learned counsel for the appellant that neither was any averment made in the petition about misuse of liberty granted to the appellant nor was any difficulty alleged to have been faced by the prosecution in the case on the ground of the appellant being at large.

5. The Magistrate cancelled the ball granted to the appellant solely on the ground that the terms of the compromise had not been complied with. To say the l