IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.883 of 2006 CHANDAN SAH @ CHANDAN KUMAR SAH & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 8 13.5.2009 The petitioners were granted bail in a case under section 498A of the Penal Code by the learned Magistrate by order dated 13.6.2000 passed in Complaint Case No.698 of 1998. Petitioner no.1 Chandan Sah denied his marriage with the complainant Kiran Devi. While granting bail, the learned Magistrate enquired from the accused persons whether Kiran Devi is the wife of accused Chandan Sah or not. On such query, they replied that Chandan Sah never married Kiran Devi. Thereupon, the learned Magistrate after considering the entire materials on record granted bail to the petitioners by his order dated 13.6.2000 passed in Complaint Case No.698 of 1998. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the complainant preferred Criminal Misc.No.52 of 2000 before the learned Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur for cancellation of their bail. The same remained pending for five years and ultimately by order dated 3.5.2005 the learned Sessions Judge cancelled the bail granted to the petitioners finding the order of learned Magistrate being not in accordance with law. The learned Sessions Judge while cancelling the bail of the petitioners has referred to the letter dated 25.3.1998 written by the complainant to her father from Ghogha which is available on the L.C. Record from which it would appear that she has referred to 2 KHAN Chandan Sah as her husband. The petitioners being aggrieved by the impugned order cancelling their bail moved this court in the instant revision and a bench of this court by order dated 13.4.2007 granted interim protection to the petitioners. This court agrees with the reasons given by the learned Sessions Judge cancelling bail of the accused persons particularly Chandan Sah, and would not have interfered in normal circumstances, but as petitioners are on bail since last about 9 years and have not misused the privilege of bail, I am not inclined to cancel the bail of the petitioners after almost 9 years since the grant of bail. The impugned order dated 3.5.2005 passed in Cr.Misc.No.52 of 2000 in the aforesaid circumstances is accordingly set aside and this revision application is allowed. However, petitioner no.1 Chandan Sah @ Chandan Kumar Sah will not physically absent himself in the court below for two consecutive dates till the trial is over. (S.P.Singh,J)