2025:JHHC:27842 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.2212 of 2023 ----- Jayanti Kumari, W/o Bishu Oraon, D/o Etwa Oraon, R/o Village- Chharda, P.O. & P.S. Sisai, District Gumla, Jharkhand ------ Petitioner(s) Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Bishu Oraon, S/o Sri Bandhana Oraon, R/o Village- Bharno Hethtoli, P.O. & P.S. Bharno, District- Gumla (Jharkhand) ------ Respondent(s) CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Niranjan Singh, Advocate For the State : Ms. Ruby Pandey, AddI. P.P. For the O.P Mr. Samabesh Bhanj Deo, Advocate …...... 08/ 12.09.2025: The present petition has been filed for cancellation of anticipatory bail order dated 10.04.2023 passed in A.B.A. No.8045 of 2022. 2. On based on a settlement, the anticipatory bail was granted to Bishu Oraon, who is the husband of this petitioner. 3. Now, the wife has moved this application for cancellation of bail on the ground that the terms of the settlement has not been complied and there are some arrears which have accumulated, which was paid to the wife. 4. The principle of cancellation of bail is well settled. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Phireram vs State of Uttar Pradesh and Another, reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1915 at para 56 has summed up the principles which is hereunder:- 56. This Court then summed up the principles or circumstance governing the cancellation of bail as under:— “25. Some of the circumstances where bail granted to the accused under Section 439(1) CrPC can be cancelled are enumerated below: (a) If he misuses his liberty by indulging in similar/other criminal activity; (b) If he interferes with the course of investigation; (c) If he attempts to tamper with the evidence; (d) If he attempts to influence/threaten the witnesses; (e) If he evades or attempts to evade court proceedings; (f) If he indulges in activities which would hamper smooth investigation; (g) If he is likely to flee from the country; (h) If he attempts to make himself scarce by going underground and/or becoming unavailable to the investigating agency; (i) If he attempts to place himself beyond the reach of his surety. (j) If any facts may emerge after the grant of bail which are considered unconducive to a fair trial. We may clarify that the aforesaid list is only illustrative in nature and not exhaustive.” 5. On the facts of this case there is no ground which would attract cancellation of bail nor the condition for cancellation of the bail is fulfilled as there is no allegation that petitioner has misused the privilege of bail. Further the case is pending for before charge evidence, Thus, I am not inclined to entertain this petition for cancellation of bail, accordingly, the same is dismissed. 6. However, the Trial court is directed to conclude the trial at the earliest, as the complaint case is of the year, 2021. (ANANDA SEN, J.) R.S./