Continuous commission of similar offences while on bail warrants cancellation for misuse of liberty.

The applicant (victim) filed an application under Section 439(2) of the Cr.P.C. (read with Section 483(3) of the B.N.S.S.) seeking the cancellation of bail granted to respondent Nos. 1 and 2 (accused) by a Coordinate Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court on July 19, 2021.

The bail was originally granted in connection with Crime No. 55/2021 involving offenses under Sections 294, 323, 324, 325, 326, and 506 r/w 34 of the IPC, subject to the condition that the accused would not engage in similar offenses.

The applicant alleged that the accused violated these conditions by committing four subsequent offenses (Crime Nos. 1204/2022, 405/2022, 25/2022, and 92/2023), one of which was of a similar nature.

The respondents argued the application was based on a long-standing civil dispute and malicious intent.

1. Whether the respondent-accused violated the specific conditions of their bail order by engaging in subsequent criminal activities.

2. Whether the repeated engagement in criminal conduct while on bail warrants the cancellation of the liberty previously granted.

The Court applied the principles governing the cancellation of bail under Section 439(2) of the Cr.P.C., relying on Dolat Ram v. State of Haryana (1995), which emphasizes that while cancellation requires "cogent and overwhelming circumstances," it is justified if the accused misuses their liberty.

The Court followed State of U.P. v. Amarmani Tripathi (2005) and Neeru Yadav v. State of U.P. (2014) to establish that repeated criminal conduct or interference with the course of justice necessitates cancellation to protect the sanctity of the judicial process.

Furthermore, citing X v. State of Telangana (2018), the Court noted that bail must not degenerate into a license for committing further offenses.

The Court examined the conduct of the respondents following their release on bail and found that they failed to abide by the mandatory condition to refrain from similar criminal involvement.

Although the respondents pointed to a settled civil dispute and the dismissal of a prior cancellation application for want of prosecution, the Court prioritized the fact that four new criminal cases had been registered against them after the grant of bail.

Specifically, Crime No. 405/2022 at P.S. Nazirabad was identified as being of a "similar nature" to the original offense.

The Court reasoned that continued liberty in the face of persistent criminal activity would defeat the ends of justice and erode the sanctity of judicial orders, as the accused had clearly misused the concession granted by the Court.

Consequently, the Court allowed the application and cancelled the bail granted to Pradeep Sahu (Respondent No. 1) and Laxman Singh Sah (Respondent No. 2) vide order dated July 19, 2021.

The Court directed the respondents to surrender immediately and ordered the trial court to issue arrest warrants to commit them to jail for necessary compliance.