1 2025:CGHC:47466 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2899 of 2025 1 - Santosh Kumar Dhurwe S/o. Besoharam Dhurwe, Aged About 48 Years R/o Village - Nawagaon Kanwar, Gatapara, District - Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station - City Kotwali Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, C.G. 2 - Piyush Wadhera S/o Shri Ashok Wadhera Aged About 32 Years R/o Ward No. 14, Nehru Nagar, P.S. Kotwali, Tahsil And District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Shailesh Tiwari, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Kishan Sahu, Dy. Government Advocate SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 16/09/2025 1. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with a prayer for cancellation of bail granted to the Respondent No. 2 vide order dated 25.04.2025 in M.Cr.C. No. 3183/2025 in connection with Crime No. 53/2024, P.S. City Kotwali, District – Rajnandgaon for the offence SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY 2 punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120 (B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner suibmits that this petiton has been filed on the ground that while allowing the bail application filed by the Respondent No. 2, this Court has not considered the parameters as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Shabeen Ahmad Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. reported in (2025) 4 SCC 172 and in case of Ajwar Vs. Waseem reported in (2024) 10 SCC 768 along with the other decisions as mentioned in the petition. 3. The grievance of petitioner from the pleadings made therein, it appears that the petitioner is questioning the legality and sustainability of the impugned order passed in the bail application, granting bail to the Respondent No. 2. In view of the nature of relief and grounds raised in this petition seeking cancellation of bail, this Court cannot test the legality and sustainability of its own order in exercise of the jurisdiction under Section 483 (3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 4. Consideration by an Appellate Court in assessing correctneess of an order granting bail stands on different footing from consideration of application seeking cancelation of bail. I find support from decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Dolat Ram & Ors. Vs. State of Haryana reported in (1995) 1 SCC 349 and Manoj Kumar Khokhar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. reported in (2022) 3 SCC 501. 5. Provision under sub-section 3 of Section 483 of B.N.S.S. 2023 provides that the High Court or Sessions Court may direct that any person who has been released on bail be arrested and commit him to custody. The powers under sub-section 3 of Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 can be exercised only when it is brought to the notice of the Court that condtiion imposed for release of a person is violated. Rejection of bail in non- bailable offence and cancelation of bail already granted are having 3 different consideration and therefore, in the opinion of this Court, this petition is sans merit. Accordingly, it is dismissed. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Dey