Crl. Misc. No.M-34908 of 2010 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-34908 of 2010 Date of Decision: September 6, 2011 Harpreet Kaur …..Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab and others …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr.H.S. Rakhra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Arshvinder Singh, Addl.A.G., Punjab. Mr.S.P.S. Sidhu, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 5. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Petitioner had been forcibly administered poisonous medicine with an intention to kill her, by her husband and his family members. Originally the FIR was registered under Section 307 IPC but later on , it was converted into an offence under Section 306 IPC read with Section 511 IPC. Thought the petitioner has not been able to establish as to how respondents No.2 to 5 misused the concession of bail warranting cancellation of bail but Crl. Misc. No.M-34908 of 2010 [2] it has been alleged that undue favour has been shown by the police and the lenient approach has been adopted by the Additional Sessions Judge while granting concession of bail to respondents No.2 to 5. Deputy Superintendent of Police, District Moga, was directed to furnish the details of the investigation conducted and the circumstances in which Section 307 IPC was reduced to Section 306 read with Section 511 IPC. It has been averred in the affidavit that as no poison was detected in the mouthwash of the petitioner, the police acting fairly to reduce the offence. Without entering into the details of the facts, I have considered the application for cancellation of bail in context to the parameters laid down by the Courts for “cancellation of bail” which are certainly different from the parameters of “rejecting the bail”, but I do not find any ground to cancel the concession of bail granted to respondents No.2 to 5. No ground is made out for cancellation of bail. Dismissed. September 6, 2011 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE