Division Bench held that since grounds for bail cancellation fall within trial court jurisdiction, this criminal application is dismissed and liable to be heard by the Competent Court.
Application dismissed with liberty to file fresh application before the Trial Court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 2270 of 2018
Applicant :- Sukhveer Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
This bail cancellation application has been filed against the order dated 15.03.2018 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Bagpat in Bail Application No. 144 of 2018, in Case Crime No. 157 of 2018, under Section 304 I.P.C, P.S. Badaut, District Bagpat against opposite party no. 2.
From the perusal of the record I found no ground to cancel the bail of opposite party no. 2.
In the case of Shahzad Hasan Khan v. Ishtiq, AIR 1987 SC 1613, the Apex Court has held that in the absence of sufficient materials to show that the accused was threatening the informant, bail granted cannot be cancelled.
In the case of Daulat Ram Vs. State of Haryana, AIR 1995 SC 1998 it was held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that the order under this section may be passed on the following grounds:-
"1. When the accused is found tampering with the evidence either during the investigation or during the trial.
2.When the persons on bail commits similar offence or any heinous offence during the period of bail.
Ground of cancellation is related to facts which can not be adjudicated by this Court and it can be decided by the trial Court where the case is pending for trial.
This bail cancellation application has not been moved by the State.
Moreover, in view of law laid down in the case of Abdul Basit @ Raju and others vs. Mohd. Abdul Kadir Chaudhary and another (2014) 10 SCC 754, this application would lie before the Court of Session Judge, not before the High Court, hence application is disposed of with liberty to file fresh bail cancellation application before the trial Court and if it is filed, it is expected from the trial Court to decide the same on merit in accordance with law expeditiously.
Certify this judgment to the lower court immediately.
Order Date :- 29.5.2018 S.K.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the bail cancellation application should be heard by the High Court or the Trial Court.
Whether there are sufficient grounds to sustain the order for canceling bail under Section 304 IPC.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Shahzad Hasan Khan v. IshtiqReferred¶8
Shahzad Hasan Khan v. Ishtiq, AIR 1987 SC 1613 · Who else cites this
Daulat Ram Vs. State of HaryanaExplained¶10
Daulat Ram Vs. State of Haryana, AIR 1995 SC 1998 · Who else cites this
Abdul Basit @ Raju and others vs. Mohd. Abdul Kadir Chaudhary and anotherRelied on¶19
Abdul Basit @ Raju and others vs. Mohd. Abdul Kadir Chaudhary and another (2014) 10 SCC 754 · Who else cites this
Sukhveer
Aniruddha Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
