KOSAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant, who is the victim"s wife, has come up before this Court under Sec. 439 (II) Cr.P.C seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the second respondent.

(2.) The complainant has submitted that the injured (her husband) had to undergo very expensive treatment at Medanta hospital and is still not fully recovered. The complainant"s another contention is that there is non-consideration of crucial factors while granting bail. Ld. counsel for the complainant further argued that there is apprehension of threat from the accused.

(3.) I have gone through the impugned order, which is detailed, well-reasoned and calls for no interference. However, given the possible threat perception, the order granting bail shall be read with following additional conditions to be strictly complied with by the accused/ respondent Arshad.