HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 801 of 2023 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. Rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Varun Kumar Chaubey, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ashok Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rakesh Maurya, Advocate holding brief of Sri Niraj Tiwari, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present bail cancellation application has been filed for setting-aside the order dated 20.11.2023 granting bail to opposite party no.2 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/FTC (Crime Against Women), Jaunpur in Bail Application No.2105 of 2023 (Shailendra Tiwari vs. State of UP) in Case Crime No.141 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 376, 511 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Maharajganj, District- Jaunpur. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the bail granted to opposite party no.2 vide order dated 20.11.2023 may be set-aside as there was allegation of unnatural offence against the applicant in the FIR itself, but there is no whispering about the said unnatural offence in the order dated 20.11.2023. Learned counsel has stated that the final report (charge-sheet) was submitted subsequent to the bail order dated 20.11.2023 i.e. on 2.1.2024. Although it also does not mention about the unnatural offence, but the said bail order is liable to be set-aside on account of non-mentioning of the fact regarding unnatural offence. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashok Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Charan Singh Yadav, G.A., Niraj Tiwari Roli Dubey .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Per contra, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has opposed the present bail cancellation application on the ground that there was no medical corroboration of unnatural offence, as such, Section 377 I.P.C. was deleted by the Investigating Officer and there is no medical corroboration of the incident either. The instant bail cancellation application is just an abuse of process of law. There is no valid ground to cancel the bail granted to opposite party no.2. The opposite party no.2 is cooperating in trial. 6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that counsel for the applicant could not bring forward any valid ground to cancel the bail granted to opposite party no.2 vide order dated 20.11.2023, I do not find it to be a fit case to cancel the bail granted to opposite party no.2. 7. The instant bail cancellation application being misconceived and without any basis stands dismissed. September 8, 2025 Vikas Verma BAILC No. 801 of 2023 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad