2026:JHHC:12165 --1-- Cr.M.P. No. 707 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 707 of 2026 ---- Nirmala Devi, aged about 55 years, wife of Kishor Tiwari, resident of Gumo Badki Gali, PO – Gumo, PS – Telaiya, District – Koderma, Jharkhand .... Petitioner -- Versus -- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Masomat Anjani @ Mostt. Anjari, aged about 93 years, wife of Late Bhikhari Mahto 3. Mahabir Mahto, aged about 68 years, son of Late Jitan Mahto 4. Parwari Devi @ Parwati Devi, aged about 63 years, wife of Mahabir Mahto 5. Damodar Mahto @ Damodar Verma, aged about 45 years, son of Mahabir Mahto 6. Dasrath Verma @ Dashrath Verma, aged about 43 years, son of Mahabir Mahto All are resident of village – Gumo, PO and PS – Telaiya, District – Koderma, Jharkhand .... Opposite Parties ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mr. Jay Shankar Tiwary, Advocate :- Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, Advocate ---- 02/24.04.2026 This petition has been filed for cancellation of bail granted to the opposite parties No.2 to 6 by order dated 17.10.2025 in ABA No.6146 of 2025. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Title Suit No.43 of 2024 was not instituted by the informant wherein submission was made that the informant has instituted the said suit. On this ground, he submits that the anticipatory bail granted to the 2026:JHHC:12165 --2-- Cr.M.P. No. 707 of 2026 opposite parties may kindly be cancelled. 3. On query made by the Court, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner admit that the said suit is pending, however, he is saying that the said suit has been instituted by one Saraiya Devi and further he has pointed out that the opposite parties as well as the petitioner is the defendant in the said suit. 4. In view of the above it transpires that the suit is pending and only because it has been noted in the order that the informant has instituted suit that cannot be a ground of cancellation of bail to the opposite party when the suit is still pending that is not in dispute. 5. It is well settled that once the bail is granted on a very cogent reason only the bail can be cancelled i.e. if allegation of tampering with the evidence and interfering with the investigation and other factors and if prima facie proved then only bail can be cancelled. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances of this case, I am not inclined to cancel the bail of the opposite parties, as such this petition is dismissed. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 24.04.2026 Sangam/