IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.1051 of 2009 S. Prasad @ Surendra Prasad, son of Late R. Prasad, Flat No.72, Jamuna Apartment, Boring Road, Patna. -Petitioner. VERSUS 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary Department of Home. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Patna. 3. The Officer-in-charge, S.K. Puri, Police Station, Patna. 4. The District & Sessions Court, Patna through its Registrar. 5. The Registrar, District & Sessions Court, Patna. -Respondents. ----------- 03 23.12.2009 The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 08.10.1999 passed by Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Patna by which his bail bond has been cancelled for lack of pairvi and now non-bailable warrants and processes under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. has been issued against him. Petitioner’s contention is simple. He states that a prosecution having been launched. He had applied to this Court for quashing of the prosecution by filing Cr. Misc. No.14133 of 1999, which was admitted and further proceedings in the Complaint Case No.471(C)/98 was stayed by order dated 26.07.1999. Petitioner states that once this Court directed for all further proceeding to be stayed, he stopped appearing in the Court below, which was a useless formality, but without appreciating the said by order dated 08.10.1999, the Trial Court cancelled his bail, which has recently been granted and now has issued processes and non-bailable warrants. Having perused the order sheet and heard the parties, in my view, the order of the Court below cannot be sustained. - 2 - Once the quashing application was admitted by this Court all further proceedings in the Court below were stayed. The Court could not have cancelled the bail as there was no necessity of making any pairvi or filing Hazari in the Court below. It may be noted here that order of this Court was communicated and is noted in the order dated 13.07.1999. In view of the aforesaid facts, I have no option but to quash the two impugned orders as aforesaid and direct that the petitioner’s bail bond cannot be deemed to be validly cancelled. The warrants issued and the processes issued are bad in law and cannot be executed. The writ application is, thus, allowed. Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)