Mahesh Bhagwati, J. - (1.) THIS order governs the disposal of an application filed under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner Mst. Bhuri seeking cancellation of bail of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 who have been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 27th September, 2008 rendered by Sessions Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur.
(2.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Counsel for the respondent as also learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and perused the relevant provisions of law as also relevant material available on record. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has craved the cancellation of bail on the following grounds: (i) That the deceased Satyanarayan Sharma unequivocally stated in the suicide note that the respondents Arjun and Chhagan had threatened him on mobile. They tortured and humiliated him. "He was fed up with the mental agony and trauma, the respondents caused to him, so he was committing suicide." (ii) That there is direct evidence against the respondents yet the learned Sessions Judge ignored the same. That the suicide note tangibly evinces that the deceased Satyanarayan Sharma was completely fed up with the threatening and taunting behaviour of the respondents. The harassment shown and the threatening given on phone abetted the deceased to commit suicide. (iii) That the suicide note written by the deceased is admissible in evidence under Section 32 of Indian Evidence Act. He has submitted the judgment of Dalbeer Singh v. : 2004CriLJ2025 in support thereof. (iv) That the cheques and the documents pertaining to motor -cycle of the deceased are yet to be recovered from the respondents. Hence, the benefit of anticipatory bail granted to the respondents deserves to be withdrawn.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the respondents and the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State have simply submitted that the learned Counsel for the petitioner has not assigned any cogent reason for cancellation of bail, as such, the petition deserves to be dismissed.;