Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.25231 of 2010 ====================================================== Yugal Kishore Singh son of late Raghubir Singh, resident of village - P.O. Akolhi, P.S. Ziradei, District Siwan. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. Manu Chauhan 3. Sanhu Chauhan, both sons of Chintawan Chauhan, resident of village Akolhi, P.S. Ziradei, District Siwan. 4. Mukesh Kumar Chauhan, son of Aklu Chauhan, resident of village Akolhi, P.S. Ziradei, District Siwan. 5. Subash Chauhan son of Phulena Chauhan, resident of village Akolhi, P.S. Ziradei, District Siwan. 6. Vikash Chauhan, father’s name not known, resident of village Akolhi, P.S. Ziradei, District Siwan. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Dr. Nagendra Kumar, Adv. For the State of Bihar : Dr. Indiwar Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 2 24-07-2012 Heard. On account of certain land dispute between the parties, an occurrence is said to have taken place on 04.05.2010. The petitioner instituted Mairwa (Jiradei) P.S. Case No. 66 of 2010 dated 04.05.2010 under [STATUTE] . For the same occurrence, Opposite Party no.2 also lodged Mairwa (Jiradei) P.S. Case No. 65 of 2010 dated 04.05.2010 under [STATUTE] . It further appears that the members of both sides sustained injuries on their persons. Learned Sessions Judge, Siwan, by taking into Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25231 of 2010 (2) dt.24-07-20 2/3 consideration that there are case and counter case from both sides with respect to same occurrence and both sides had sustained injuries on their persons, allowed the prayer for anticipatory bail made on behalf of Opposite Party no.2 to 6 by the impugned order dated 16.06.2010 passed in ABP No. 468 of 2010. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the prosecution case, as disclosed in the F.I.R., vide Annexure-1, has not been properly appreciated by the learned Sessions Judge, Siwan for the purpose of grant of anticipatory bail. He contends that by re-appreciating the evidence/materials available on record, the bail granted to Opposite Party no. 2 to 6 be cancelled. No other legal grounds have been raised for the purpose of cancellation of bail. It is well settled that rejection of bail of an accused stands on one footing, but cancellation of bail stands on altogether different footing. The principles, which can be applied for the purpose of rejection of bail, cannot be applied in toto for the purpose of cancellation of bail. Cancellation of bail of an accused is a harsher step since it takes away the liberty of an accused granted by an order of the court. After the impugned order dated 16.06.2010 more than two years have elapsed, but there is no allegation that accused Opposite Party no. 2 to 6 have misused the privilege of bail granted to them. For the reasons recorded above and in the facts and circumstances, no case for cancellation of bail is made out. In the result, the application has to be dismissed. However, learned trial court is hereby directed to expedite the hearing of trial of accused Opposite Party no. 2 to 6 and all endeavours should be made to conclude the trial at an early date preferably within a period of one year from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25231 of 2010 (2) dt.24-07-20 2/3 With the aforesaid observations and directions, this application stands dismissed. BTiwary/- (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 325

Statute Text:
Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code. Voluntarily causing grievous hurt. Whoever, except in the case provided for by section 335, voluntarily causes grievous hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.