SAJEENDRAN Vs. KABEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defacto complainant in three crimes where the accused was granted anticipatory bail have approached this Court for cancellation of the bail by filing these Crl.M.Cs. The accused was granted bail as per orders of this Court in B.A.No.5818 of 2020, 5913 of 2020 and 5914 of 2020. He was directed to surrender within two weeks. The condition was that he should not get engage in any other crime. The bail could not be executed and the applicant has not yet been arrested by the Investigating Officer. And, therefore, the bail has not come into effect. The applicant has now today been granted two weeks time to surrender before the Investigating Officer. Even before the applicant had surrendered and was released on bail, the defacto complainant, who did not appear in the applications for anticipatory bail have now come up with these Crl.M.Cs seeking cancellation of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The accused was granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C and he has not yet been arrested and the bail bond has not been executed. And, therefore, these applications for cancellation of bail are definitely premature. In the event of the applicant, violating the conditions of the bail as per the bail orders referred to above, the learned Public Prosecutor was given the liberty to approach the jurisdictional court for cancellation of the bail. The defacto complainant have definitely no authority or jurisdiction to appear before this Court with an application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail which was granted to the accused.

(2.) The Crl.M.C.s are therefore, dismissed.