IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION No. 223 Of 2010 Noor Hasan @ Bhoto S/O Hameed R/O Village Margubpur Didahedi P.S. Bahadrabad District Haridwar ……………. Applicants Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand, Through Secretary Home Dehradun 2. Kamil S/O Ahmad Hasan R/O Village Margubpur Didahedi P.S Bahadrabad District Haridwar ………….. Respondents Shri Mohd. Safdar, Advocate present for the petitioner Shri Prabhakar Joshi, present for the State Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. (2) By means of this petition moved Under Section 482 of Code of Criminal procedure, 1973, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 13.08.2009 passed by Sessions Judge Haridwar on bail cancellation application no. 129 of 2008 where by said application has been rejected. (3) Brief facts of the case are that bail application no. 1143 of 2008 moved on behalf of respondent no.2 – Kamil relating to crime no. 139 on 2008 in respect of offences punishable under section 376, 506 I.P.C, Police Station, Bahadrabad was allowed vide order dated 03.09.2008 by Incharge Sessions Judge Haridwar, on the ground mentioned there in. It appears that the petitioner filed application no. 129 of 2008 before the Sessions Judge, Haridwar for cancellation of bail granted to respondent no.2- Kamil. After hearing the parties, application for cancellation of bail was dismissed vide order-dated 13.08.2009. (4) Application for the cancellation of bail can be allowed on limited grounds like (a) obtaining bail by misrepresenting the facts or (b) the accused after bail is granted, has started abusing the bail or started threatening the witnesses, or (c) that material/important fact has been ignored by the Court in granting the bail, or (d) for other similar reason. (5) Having considered submissions of learned Counsel for the parties and after going through the bail order and the order rejecting cancellation of bail application, this Court finds there is no such ground in the present case which, at this stage makes out a case for cancellation of the bail granted to the accused, as such this Court is not inclined to interfere that the impugned order passed by the Sessions Judge. Therefore, this petition is under section 482 of Cr.P.C is dismissed with the observation that the trial Court shall proceed further with the trial, as expeditiously as possible. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt.18.3.2010 Nahid