IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.45990 of 2009 Dwarika Sao, S/O Late Lakshmi Sao, R/O Vill.- Raili English, P.S.- Pandarak, Distt.- Patna. ………….Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Sant Kumar Yadav, S/O Bhagirath Yadav, R/O Vill.- Raili English, P.S.- Pandarak, Distt.- Patna. ………Opposite Parties ---------------------------------- 2. 16.12.2011 The informant-victim-petitioner has preferred this application under Section 439 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for cancellation of bail to the opposite party no.2, who was granted bail vide order dated 10.11.2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, XII, Patna in Bail Petition No.4345/2009 in Pandarak P.S. Case No.79/2009 for the offences punishable under Section 307 and other allied sections of the I.P.C. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the accused has criminal antecedent. He is involved in Pandarak P.S. Case Nos. 78/2007, 15/2008 and 50/2009 and in all these cases, charge-sheet has been filed against him. In this view of the matter, it was not correct to say that the accused has 2 no criminal antecedent and on this ground also, the accused was granted bail. Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta, the learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner may raise his grievance and produce all the material before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, who has passed the impugned order, who has also power and is competent to pass the order for cancellation of bail under Section 439 (2) of the Cr.P.C. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State, it appears that contention of the learned counsel for the State is correct. The petitioner is at liberty to raise his grievance before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, XII, Patna, who will consider the matter and pass appropriate order. This petition stands disposed of. V.K. Pandey ( Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)