AJAY CHAUNKAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant was granted bail by A.C.J.M., Haldwani, vide order dated 10.05.2013 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 504 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act. Subsequent thereto, a chargesheet was filed by the Investigating Officer against the applicant with respect to offences punishable under Sections 406 & 506 IPC also. The complainant moved an application for cancellation of bail of the applicant on the grounds, inter alia, that the applicant was not granted bail for the offences punishable under Sections 406 & 506 IPC and that the applicant was threatening her. Learned A.C.J.M., Haldwani, therefore, cancelled the bail of the applicant, vide order dated 22.05.2014.

(2.) AGGRIEVED against the same, present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was moved.

(3.) TODAY , learned counsel for the applicant has placed a copy of the order dated 04.06.2014 passed by learned Incharge, Sessions Judge, Nainital to show that the applicant was granted bail for the offences punishable under Sections 406 & 506 IPC also. Thus, one of the grounds, on the basis of which the bail of the applicant was cancelled, has been met by the applicant. [The applicant has been enlarged on bail under Sections 406 & 506 IPC.] The other ground, on the basis of which the bail of the application was cancelled, was that the applicant intimidated his daughter -in -law (complainant). It was held by Hon'ble Apex Court in Dolat Ram & others vs. State of Haryana, : (1995) 1 SCC 349, that bail once granted should not be cancelled in a mechanical manner without considering whether any supervening circumstances have rendered it no longer conducive to a fair trial to allow the accused to retain his freedom. Learned counsel for the applicant also placed reliance upon the rulings of Hon'ble Apex Court in Sami Ullaha vs. Superintendent, Narcotic Central Bureau, : 2009 N.C.C. 117 and Samarendra Nath Battacharjee vs. State of West Bengal & another : (2004) 11 SCC 165.