IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.43533 of 2008 REKHA DEVI Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 5 25.3.2009 The petitioner who is the complainant has prayed for cancellation of bail granted to Opposite party no.2 on 10.3.2008 in a case under sections 120B, 419,420,466, 467 and 468 of the Penal Code. The allegation is impersonation and committing forgery. In view of the relief sought this court need not go into the merit of the allegation. It appears that this court while granting bail to the Opposite party no.2 on 10.3.2008 passed in Cr.Misc.No.6376 of 2008 imposed two conditions; one of the conditions levied was that the Opposite partry no.2 Tunni @ Binay Lal Tatak will desist from threatening the witnesses or tampering with the evidence. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that the Opposite party no.2 threatened the witness Hem Nath Ojha just after his deposition and both the complainant and Hem Nath Ojha filed an application to this effect before the learned trial court as contained in Annexures-2,3,4 and 5. He submits that enquiry may be ordered in this respect by the trial court itself. Learned counsel for the Opposite party no.2 submits that out of six witnesses, four witnesses have been examined and only two witnesses are left to be examined. He further submits that these 2 KHAN witnesses want to get examined on Commission and as such there could be no apprehension of any threat. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this court is of the view that if the petitioner files a petition in this regard, the trial court will examine whether Opposite party no.2 has violated the conditions imposed by this Court, while granting bail. In case he comes to the conclusion that the Opposite party no.2 has threatened the witnesses, he will pass appropriate order cancelling his bail, otherwise not. With the aforesaid observation, this application stands disposed of. (S.P.Singh,J)