ROHINI DUA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Sec. 439(2), Code Criminal Procedure has been filed for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to Smt. Sushma (respondent No. 2) by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Gurgaon, vide his order dated 21.2.2007 (Annexure P2). The case FIR No. 758 dated 16.12.2006 (Annexure Pl) has been filed by the petitioner alleging harassment and misappropriation of dowry articles as a result of her marriage with Raman Dua. The FIR has been registered against the accused for the offences under Sections 498A/406A, Indian Penal Code. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurgaon, vide order dated 21.2.2007(Annexure P2) has granted anticipatory bail to Smt. Sushma (respondent No. 2) who is the mother- in-law of the petitioner, the cancellation of which has now been sought.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that no recovery has been effected from accused/respondent No. 2 and neither any investigation been carried out and yet respondent No. 2 has been granted the concession of pre-arrest bail. The same therefore it is submitted is liable to be cancelled.

(3.) After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter it may be noticed that rejection of bail is on one footing but cancellation is a harsh order as it takes away the liberty of an individual. Therefore, the cancellation of bail is not to be lightly resorted to. It is only when the accused to whom the bail has been granted tries to interfere with the due course of justice or attempts to tamper with the evidence or threatens them or indulges in similar activities which would hamper the smooth investigation or the trial of the case that bail is to be cancelled. Therefore, for the purpose of cancellation of bail it is primarily to be seen by the Court whether the accused has misused the privilege or concession of bail granted in the present case. Nothing has been shown that respondent No. 2 has in any manner misused the concession of bail that has been granted. Therefore, the cancellation of bail is not to be resorted to as a measure to impose punishment in respect of the case registered for the offences under Sections 498A, 406A, Indian Penal Code. The trial is yet to start and it is to be gone into after the trial of the case as to whether respondent No. 2 has committed the offence as has been attributed to her.