(1.) This petition under S. 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is for cancellation of bail granted to one Ms. Bhagwan Dai by the learned Sessions Judge, Gurgaon vide its order dated 18-4-1995.
(2.) The case under S. 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code in FIR 81 dated 8-2-1995 was registered and said Bhagwan Dai was arrested by the police. She filed a bail application which was granted by the learned Sessions Judge, Gurgaon vide impugned order. While granting bail, the learned Judge noticed that the name of the accused (Bhagwan Dai) was not mentioned in the FIR and taking into consideration the nature of allegations and the fact that the prosecution has not produced FSL report in spite of opportunities, the applicant was held entitled to be released on bail. Consequently she was released on bail subject to her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court. It is this order which is assailed before this Court, mainly on the ground that Bhagwan Dai had been specifically named in the FIR and thus the learned Court below had erred in drawing the conclusion prima facie that she is not named in the FIR which was the sole ground for granting the concession of bail to the said applicant. It needs to be pointed out here that certain allegations were made in paragraph 6 of this petition which were apparently baseless and consequently the petitioner was directed to be present in Court to substantiate these allegations. Paragraph 6 of this petition reads as under :
(3.) On these facts, the learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of this case in case Saudagar Singh v. State of Haryana reported as 1994 (2) RCR 293 : (1995 Cri LJ 1599) to argue that the bail granted to Smt. Bhagwan Dai is liable to be cancelled because there was wrong appreciation of facts by the trial Court.