IMPORTANT POINT
Bail--Cancellation of--Application not necessarily be moved by State only--An aggrieved person or important witness can also move such an application.
Bail--Cancellation of--Bail obtained by fraud, is sufficient to recall order of bail.

1. Shri Dharmpal in FIR No. 140 dated 28.11.2005 for offence under Sections 302/307 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Sections 25/27/24/54/59 of the Indian Arms Act. The accused who is respondent No. 2 in this petition was one of the accused in the aforesaid FIR and was facing the trial. He filed bail application being Crl. Misc. No. 75824-M of 2006 which came to be dismissed as withdrawn on 4.12.2006. The said accused filed the second bail application being Crl. Misc. No. 3746-M of 2008 before this Court. The bail was sought primarily on medical grounds. The accused pleaded that he is suffering from serious ailment and further custody of the accused would not be conducive to his health. This Court called a report from the Jail. One Dr. Karamjit Singh posted as Senior Medical Officer, Incharge Central Jail, Patiala submitted his report dated 5.10.2007 to the Superintendent, Incharge Central Jail, Patiala giving details of the treatments given to the accused from time to time. The said doctor also appeared in the Court alongwith the report. During the course of hearing, the doctor informed the court that the accused is suffering from heart ailment on account of old injury he suffered from seizure at varied durations. On a specific query by the court, the doctor gave his opinion that further custody of the accused might not be safe, in view of the history of seizure suffered by the accused, On the basis of the report and the medical opinion, this Court vide order dated 10.10.2007 granted bail to accused- respondent No. 2 with conditions that he will not influence the witnesses or threaten them or interfere with the trial. From the order dated 10.10.2007, it appears that the bail was granted only on medical grounds. The complainant in the present case has contested the claim of the accused of suffering from any serious ailment warranting grant of bail on medical grounds. In addition to the ground that the bail was procured by the accused in collusion with jail staff and the doctor, the complainant has also referred to DDRs entered by the police being DDR No. 30 dated 30.10.2007 under Sections 107/151 Cr.P.C. and DDR No. 24 dated 21.11.2007. It has been alleged that even after securing the concession of bail by, misrepresentation and manipulation, the accused has attempted to attack the complainant and other members of his family and threatened them with the Superintendent, Central Jail, Patiala. The report relates to the CT scan of the accused which indicates that the accused was normal and had no serious ailments. The complainant also alleged that the medical record has been manipulated by the accused and there are cuttings in the medical record maintained in thejail. Keeping in view the aforesaid circumstances, this Court vide its order dated 15.2.2008, while issuing notice of motion constituted a Board of Doctors in the PGI to examine respondent No. 2-accused and to give opinion with regard to his past medical history and also whether there would be any danger to the life of the accused if he is kept in jail. Consequent upon the aforesaid order passed by this Court, the accused was examined by Board of Doctors and the report of the medical board vide communication dated 15.3.2008 was filed before this Court. This report was taken on record and bailable warrants were issued against respondent No. 2 vide order dated 24.3.2008. Vide subsequent order dated 9.4.2008, this Court on examination of the report of the Board of Doctors called for comments of Dr. Karamjit Singh, the doctor posted in the jail on whose report and statement, the accused was granted bail. Subsequently, Dr. Karamjit Singh was placed under suspension and he filed a writ petition being CWPNo. 10525 of 2008 which was listed before a Division Bench of this Court and this application for cancellation of bail was also accordingly directed to be listed before the Honble Division Bench vide order dated 23.7.2008. Since the matter has again been allocated to