IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.45950 of 2007 ABDUL SATTAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 9 15.4.2009 This case was heard on 27.3.2009. It appears that on 27.3.2009 this application was allowed with certain observations and directions but on account of some error in noting serial number of the case a different order was typed viz. “As prayed for, put up this case after two weeks retaining its position.” On the aforesaid date this Court had passed the following order which is being reproduced. “The learned counsel for the petitioner is present. No one appears on behalf of the opposite party even today. Same was the situation on the previous two occasions also. As such, this case is being taken up and heard on merit. The petitioner has prayed for cancellation of order dated 20.2.06, whereby bail was granted to O.Ps. no.2 and 3. Learned counsel submits that it would appear from the impugned order that bail was granted in view of the terms of the compromise entered between the parties. Pursuant to the 2 compromise a panchnama was filed in this Court. The petitioner alleges that the accused violated the terms of the compromise and did not return Rs.87,000/- by the end of May,2006. It is submitted that the opposite parties duped the complainant in entering into the compromise without any intention to fulfil the conditions mentioned therein. The order granting bail in clear terms stated the bail was being granted on the basis of compromise. The petitioner then filed an application for quashing the bail order. The quashing application was allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to file an appropriate application under the relevant provision. As such the petitioner has filed instant application under section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. for cancellation of bail. It prima facie appears that the opposite parties have not fulfilled the conditions mentioned in the compromise to pay a sum of Rs.87,000/- by the end of May,2006. It is submitted that uptil now the aforesaid amount has not been paid. The opposite parties have not appeared to controvert the submissions made by 3 the petitioner. In the circumstance, this court is left with no option but to cancel the bail granted to opposite parties no.2 and 3. In the result, the bail granted to the opposite parties no.2 and 3 on 20.2.06 is hereby cancelled and they are directed to surrender in the court below. With the aforesaid observation and direction this application is allowed.” Anilkr.sinha (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)