1 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1996 of 2009 State of Maharashtra ... Applicant versus Shashikant Sudhakar Aayre ... Respondent ... Mrs.M.R.Tidke APP for the applicant State. Mr.Pratap Patil i/b Manoj Kadam for the respondent. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATED : 11th February 2010 P.C. 1. By this application, State prays for cancellation of a bail granted to the respondent by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Mangaon vide order dated 6th January 2009. 2. There is a clear distinction between an initial order rejecting the bail and an order to be passed by superior court cancelling the bail previously granted. In the former, the bail is refused on merits while in the case latter, the order granting bail can be cancelled ordinarily on 2 three grounds ie.(i) That the applicant has misused the bail granted to him by threatening the witnesses or interfering with the prosecution witness or otherwise (ii) discovery of new material which was not available with the prosecution when the bail was granted. (iii) on the ground that the order of the lower court is perverse. 3. In the present case, bail is not sought to be cancelled on the first two grounds. As regards the perversity of the order of the Sessions Judge, learned APP was unable to point out any perversity of the order of the learned Sessions Judge. Merely because two views are possible and the learned Sessions Judge has chosen to take a view, this court cannot cancel the bail on the ground that the other view was a possible view unless the view on which the bail has been granted is perverse or is so improbable that no reasonable person would act upon it . No perversity has been shown in the order of the learned Sessions Judge. Application is therefore dismissed. (D.G. KARNIK,J.)