Legal Provisions Involved: Section 439(2) read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and Section 483(2) read with Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 and Sections 420, 457, 384, 467, 419, 471, 201, 120-B, 341, 389 and 34 of IPC.

Judgement by: High Court of Punjab and Haryana.

Judge/Bench: Justice Sumeet Goel.

Facts

The complainant alleged that the accused and others came to his house pretending to be Enforcement Directorate officers, threatened to falsely implicate him in a tax case, and demanded ₹5 lakh. He paid ₹2.5 lakh. Later, it was found that no such ED raid had taken place. The accused was granted anticipatory bail and joined the investigation. The complainant then approached the High Court seeking cancellation of that bail, claiming the accused threatened him after getting bail.

Key Legal Provisions

Section 439(2) read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and Section 483(2) read with Section 528 of BNSS, 2023.

Sections 420, 457, 384, 467, 419, 471, 201, 120-B, 341, 389 and 34 of IPC.

Issues Raised

Can anticipatory bail be cancelled only because the allegations are serious?

Arguments of the case

The complainant argued that the accused misused the liberty granted by the court. The accused stated that he followed all bail conditions and cooperated with the investigation.

Judgement

The High Court held that bail cannot be cancelled only because the offence is serious. There must be clear proof that the accused misused bail or violated conditions. Since no strong material was placed on record, the petition for cancellation of bail was dismissed.

Click here to VIEW the full judgement.