Judgment & Order

This application under Section 528 of BNSS corresponding to Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is filed for setting aside the order dated 18.11.2024 passed by Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.4, West Tripura, Agartala in B.A. No.234 of 2024 wherein the respondent-accused was granted present bail by the Learned Trial Court.

02. Heard Learned P.P., Mr. R. Datta appearing on behalf of the State-applicant and also heard Learned Counsel, Mr. A. Bhattacharjee appearing on behalf of the respondent-accused.

03. Taking part in the hearing, Learned P.P., Mr. R. Datta drawn the attention of the Court referring the FIR laid by the informant, Apu Rani Sarkar, on the basis of which East Agartala, P.S. case No.119 of 2024 was registered under Sections 329(3)/308(5)/109/61(2)/351(2)/3(5). It was further submitted that after registration of the case the respondent-accused approached for anticipatory bail and Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.4 at the time of delivery of the order came to the observation that there was no materials against the respondent-accused under Sections 109/308(5) of BNSS, 2023 and Section111(1) of BNS, 2023 and ultimately granted pre-arrest bail to the accused without application of proper mind for which the interference of the Court is also required. It was further submitted that after granting of pre-arrest bail by the Learned Trial Court, he threatened one of the prime witness of the case and for that said prime witness, Dipa Dasgupta on 25.09.2025 submitted one FIR to O/C, East Agartala P.S. on the basis of which another case has been registered. So, Learned P.P. submitted that since the respondent-accused has violated the conditions of bail granted to him and the order passed by the Learned Trial Court suffers from infirmities and as such the same needs to be interfered with and accordingly, the prosecution has filed this petition for cancellation of bail granted to the respondent-accused.

Reliance was placed in this regard to a judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in State of Karnataka v. Sri Darshan Etc. reported in (2025) SCC OnLine SC 1702, wherein in para Nos.18.1, 18.4 and 18.8, Hon’ble the Apex Court observed as under:

“(A) Annulment of bail orders

18.1. This refers to the appellate or revisional power to set aside a bail order that is perverse, unjustified, or passed in violation of settled legal principles. It is concerned with defects existing at the time the bail was granted, without reference to subsequent conduct.

18.4. Similarly, in Dr. Narendra K. Amin v. State of Gujarat, (2008) 6 Scale 415, a three-Judge Bench held that consideration of irrelevant materials renders the bail order vulnerable and liable to be set aside.

18.8. In Anil Kumar Yadav v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2018) 12 SCC 129, this Court reiterated that while no exhaustive list can be laid down, courts must always consider the totality of circumstances, including the seriousness of the offence, prima facie evidence, and potential for interference with the trial.”

Referring the same Learned P.P. submitted that considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of present bail needs to be cancelled.

He also relied upon another order of the Coordinate Bench of this Court dated 23.03.2026 in Crl.P.No.13 of 2026 wherein in para Nos.19, 24 and 34 it was observed as under:

[19] In reply, Mr. S. Sarkar, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent-accused has submitted at the outset that the present petition under Section-528 of BNSS for setting aside the order dated 27.02.2026 passed by the learned Court below is not maintainable in its present form and nature inasmuch as, it is settled law that the provision of Section-528 of BNSS cannot be invoked if there is a specific provision in the statute for the redress of the grievance of the aggrieved party i.e. the cancellation of bail. There is no direct evidence linking the accused with the crime. The police has filed charge-sheet merely on suspici