Neeraj Wadhawan v. State of Punjab and another

Judgment

#1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483(3) of the Present petition has been filed under Section 483(3) of the Present petition has been filed under Section 483(3) of the of anticipatory bail granted to respondent BNSS, 2023 seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to respondent of anticipatory bail granted to respondent BNSS, 2023 seeking No.2 vide order dated 19.01.2026 (Annexure P No.2 vide order dated 4) passed by Sessions Judge, (Annexure P-4) passed by Sessions Judge, Ferozepur in FIR No.294 dated 18.10.2025 Ferozepur ered for offences 18.10.2025 registered for offences of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 at Police punishable under Section 61 of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 at Police of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 at Police punishable under Section Station Sadar, Ferozepur. Station Sadar, Ferozepur.

#2. The relevant portion of the order passed by Sessions Judge, The relevant portion of the order passed by Sessions Judge, The relevant portion of the order passed by Sessions Judge, Ferozepur, reads as under: Ferozepur “Heard. In view of the aforesaid specific stand taken by the State “Heard. In view of the aforesaid specific stand taken by the State “Heard. In view of the aforesaid specific stand taken by the State to the fact that the petitioner is no more required for custodial to the fact that the petitioner is no more required for custodial to the fact that the petitioner is no more required for custodial interrogation, the detailed order dated 29.10.2025 passed by this Court, interrogation, the detailed order dated 29.10.2025 passed by this Court, interrogation, the detailed order dated 29.10.2025 passed by this Court, this bail application is while granting the relief of interim protection in this bail application is while granting the relief of interim protection in hereby made absolute. The petitioner shall continue to abide by the hereby made absolute. The petitioner shall continue to abide by the hereby made absolute. The petitioner shall continue to abide by the conditions incorporated in the previous order. This bail application conditions incorporated in the previous order. This bail application conditions incorporated in the previous order. This bail application CRM-M- -6185-2026 2

stands allowed and disposed of, accordingly. Police record be returned stands allowed and disposed of, accordingly. Police record be returned stands allowed and disposed of, accordingly. Police record be returned and file be consigned to the record room. ed to the record room.”

#3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the Court Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the Court Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the Court below has passed the said impugned order below has in a mechanical manner without impugned order in a mechanical manner without the seriousness and gravity of the allegations. Learned counsel appreciating the seriousness and gravity of the allegations. Learned counsel the seriousness and gravity of the allegations. Learned counsel appreciating case pertains to manufacture and sale of spurious has further iterated that the case pertains to manufacture and sale of spurious case pertains to manufacture and sale of spurious has furthe liquor which poses great danger to public health and safety. It has been liquor which poses great danger to public health and safety. It has been liquor which poses great danger to public health and safety. It has been liquor which poses great danger to public health and safety. It has been further submitted that the recovery of 200 litres of illicit alcohol and the further submitted that the recovery of 200 litres of illicit alcohol and the further submitted that the recovery of 200 litres of illicit alcohol and the further submitted that the recovery of 200 litres of illicit alcohol and the CFSL report indicating presence of alcohol CFSL report indicating presence of high concentration which lcohol in high concentration which clearly establishes the hazardous nature of the substance involved. It has clearly establishes the hazardous nature of the substance involved. It has clearly establishes the hazardous nature of the substance involved. It has clearly establishes the hazardous nature of the substance involved. It has been further contended that such unlawful been further contended that such activities have previously unlawful activities have previously the State and therefore, the custodial the State and therefore, the custod resulted in loss of several life within the State and therefore, the custod resulted in essential to unearth the larger conspiracy. It essential to unearth the larger conspiracy. interrogation of the petitioner is essential to unearth the larger conspiracy. interrogation of the petitioner has been further argued that the impugned order has been passed without has been further argued that the impugned order has been passed without has been further argued that the impugned order has been passed without has been further argued that the impugned order has been passed without eeping in view the gravity of offence, application of mind. Thus, keeping in view the gravity of offence eeping in view the gravity of offence application of mind. Thus, k cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to respondent No.2 is entreated cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to respondent No.2 is entreated cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to respondent No.2 is entreated cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to respondent No.2 is entreated for.

28.02.2026 Learned State counsel has filed status report dated 28.02.2026 Learned State counsel has filed Sukhwinder Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of by way of an affidavit of Sukhwinder Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Sukhwinder Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of by way of an affidavit of and has raised submissions in tandem with Police (City), District Ferozepur and has raised submissions in tandem with and has raised submissions in tandem with Police (City), District Ferozep the said status report; relevant whereof reads as under: the said status report; relevant whereof reads as under: the said status report; relevant whereof reads as under: “3. The present FIR was registered on the basis of secret information against The present FIR was registered on the basis of secret information against The present FIR was registered on the basis of secret information against already been four accused. The details qua the facts of the FIR have already been four accused. The details qua the facts of the FIR have given in details in the column meant for “Bias registration of the FIR”. given in details in the column meant for “Bias registration of the FIR”. given in details in the column meant for “Bias registration of the FIR”. During investigation of the case, the statement of witnesses Morha Singh During investigation of the case, the statement of witnesses Morha Singh During investigation of the case, the statement of witnesses Morha Singh and Harish were recorded by the Investigating Officer and both the and Harish were recorded by the Investigating Officer and both the and Harish were recorded by the Investigating Officer and both the ey heard the accused discussing among witnesses have stated that they heard the accused discussing among ey heard the accused discussing among CRM-M- -6185-2026 3 the form of alcohol as cheap themselves “that they are selling ethanol” I the form of alcohol as cheap themselves “that they are selling ethanol” I alternate to the whisky. Details of All Accused accused persons, best efforts are being In order to arrest the accused persons, best efforts are being accused persons, best efforts are being and raids are regularly conducted in made by the Police Department and raids are regularly conducted in made by the Police Department order to arrest them. Status Name of the Accused Sukhwinder Singh son of Jagir Yet to be arrested. Sukhwinder Singh son of Jagir Singh Sukhpreet Singh alias Sukha Amrik Singh Atma Singh Joined investigation Yet to be arrested Yet to be arrested Status of Investigation.

#4. That the investigation in this case is still under way.” That the investigation in this case is still under way.

#5. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 has iterated Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 has iterated Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 has iterated that the present petition is misconceived as the petitioner has failed to make that the present petition is misconceived as the petitioner has failed to make that the present petition is misconceived as the petitioner has failed to make that the present petition is misconceived as the petitioner has failed to make out any grounds that would warrant cancellation of anticipatory bail already out any grounds that would warrant cancellation of anticipatory bail already out any grounds that would warrant cancellation of anticipatory bail already out any grounds that would warrant cancellation of anticipatory bail already the order granting anticipatory granted by the Court below. Furthermore, the order granting anticipatory granted by the Court below. Furthermore, granted by the Court below. Furthermore, bail is a well reasoned and speaking order which has been passed after bail is a well reasoned and speaking order which has been passed after bail is a well reasoned and speaking order which has been passed after bail is a well reasoned and speaking order which has been passed after considering the material placed before the Court. According to learned considering the material placed before the Court. According to learned considering the material placed before the Court. According to learned considering the material placed before the Court. According to learned counsel, the respondent No.2 has cooperated fully with the investigation and counsel, the respondent No.2 has cooperated fully with the investigation and counsel, the respondent No.2 has cooperated fully with the investigation and counsel, the respondent No.2 has cooperated fully with the investigation and supervening circumstances or misuse of liberty have been shown by the no supervening circumstances or misuse of liberty have been shown by the supervening circumstances or misuse of liberty have been shown by the supervening circumstances or misuse of liberty have been shown by the petitioner. On the strength of these submissions, the dismissal of the instant petitioner. On the strength of these submissions, the dismissal of the instant petitioner. On the strength of these submissions, the dismissal of the instant petitioner. On the strength of these submissions, the dismissal of the instant petition is prayed for. petition is prayed for.

#6. I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties and have I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties and have I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties and have perused the record. perused the reco

#7. It would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment passed by It would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment passed by It would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment passed by Dinesh Madan vs. State of Haryana and another in Dinesh Madan vs. State of Haryana and another this Court titled as Dinesh Madan vs. State of Haryana and another this Court CRM-M-9029 9029-2023, decided on 17.05.2024; relevant whereof reads as , decided on 17.05.2024; relevant whereof reads as under:- CRM-M- -6185-2026 4 “12. cancellation of bail” is statutorily manifested in cancellation of bail” is statutorily manifested The concept of “cancellation of bail” is statutorily manifested terms of Section 439 (2) of 1973 Code. This concept was embodied in the terms of Section 439 (2) of 1973 Code. This concept was embodied in the terms of Section 439 (2) of 1973 Code. This concept was embodied in the with difference(s). The ratio earlier statute i.e. 1898 Code as well albeit with difference(s). The ratio earlier statute i.e. 1898 Code as well decidendi of judgment in case of Gurcharan Singh ) makes it clear Gurcharan Singh (supra) makes it clear that, in the 1898 Code, the bail granted by the High Court could be cancelled that, in the 1898 Code, the bail granted by the High Court could be cancelled that, in the 1898 Code, the bail granted by the High Court could be cancelled only by it & bail granted by a Sessions Court could be cancelled by such only by it & bail granted by a Sessions Court could be cancelled by such only by it & bail granted by a Sessions Court could be cancelled by such Sessions Court only. However, Section 439(2) of 1973 Code has vested Sessions Court only. However, Section 439(2) of 1973 Code has vested Sessions Court only. However, Section 439(2) of 1973 Code has vested power to cancel bail which has been granted “ ” upon both il which has been granted “under this chapter” upon both under this Chapter” the High Court as also the Sessions Court. The words “under this Chapter” the High Court as also the Sessions Court. The words “ relates to Chapter XXXIII of Cr.P.C. of 1973 & hence the unequivocal result relates to Chapter XXXIII of Cr.P.C. of 1973 & hence the unequivocal result relates to Chapter XXXIII of Cr.P.C. of 1973 & hence the unequivocal result ons Court have requisite thereof is that the High Court as also the Sessions Court have requisite thereof is that the High Court as also the Sessi “any bail” granted by “any Court” by way of powers powers to cancel “any bail” granted by “any Court” by way of powers “any bail” granted by “any Court” by way of powers vested under this Chapter. In other words; the High Court is well vested under this Chapter. In other words; the High Court is well vested under this Chapter. In other words; the High Court is well empowered to cancel a bail granted by itself or by a Sessions Court or by the empowered to cancel a bail granted by itself or by a Sessions Court or by the empowered to cancel a bail granted by itself or by a Sessions Court or by the ate while the Sessions Court is empowered to cancel a bail Court of a Magistrate while the Sessions Court is empowered to cancel a bail ate while the Sessions Court is empowered to cancel a bail granted by High Court or by itself or by a Magistrate. However, a Sessions granted by High Court or by itself or by a Magistrate. However, a Sessions granted by High Court or by itself or by a Magistrate. However, a Sessions Court can cancel bail granted by High Court only on account of Court can cancel bail granted by High Court only on account of Court can cancel bail granted by High Court only on account of of such accused supervening/new circumstances or on account of misconduct of such accused supervening/new circumstances or on account of misconduct or on account of violation of any condition(s) imposed by the High Court or on account of violation of any condition(s) imposed by the High Court or on account of violation of any condition(s) imposed by the High Court while granting bail. The Magistrate can, of course, cancel bail granted by while granting bail. The Magistrate can, of course, cancel bail granted by while granting bail. The Magistrate can, of course, cancel bail granted by him but he cannot cancel a bail granted by High Court or Sessions Court him but he cannot cancel a bail granted by High Court or Sessions Court him but he cannot cancel a bail granted by High Court or Sessions Court except when such accused has violated/ any condition(s) cused has violated/contravened any condition(s) imposed upon by such High Court or Sessions Court while granting bail to imposed upon by such High Court or Sessions Court while granting bail to imposed upon by such High Court or Sessions Court while granting bail to such accused. This position, is indubitable, as a Magistrate has been vested such accused. This position, is indubitable, as a Magistrate has been vested such accused. This position, is indubitable, as a Magistrate has been vested tion 437(5) of 1973 with powers for cancellation of bail only in terms of Section 437(5) of 1973 with powers for cancellation of bail only in terms of Sec the High Court and Sessions Court have been vested with Code whereas the High Court and Sessions Court have been vested with the High Court and Sessions Court have been vested with powers under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., of 1973 to cancel “any bail granted powers under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., of 1973 to cancel “any bail granted powers under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., of 1973 to cancel “any bail granted under Chapter XXXIII of 1973 Code”. under Chapter XXXIII of 1973 Code”.

12.1 n who has Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C., 1973 deals with “any person who has Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C., 1973 deals with “any perso been released on bail under this Chapter” i.e. Chapter XXXIII of 1973 Code, been released on bail under this Chapter” i.e. Chapter XXXIII of 1973 Code, been released on bail under this Chapter” i.e. Chapter XXXIII of 1973 Code, which engirths in itself, Section 438 of the Code (provision envisaging which engirths in itself, Section 438 of the Code (provision envisaging which engirths in itself, Section 438 of the Code (provision envisaging arrest bail) as well. Hence such power operates in anticipatory bail/pre-arrest bail) as well. Hence such power operates in arrest bail) as well. Hence such power operates in ls, whether regular bail or anticipatory bail. Ergo, realm of all kinds of bails, whether regular bail or anticipatory bail. Ergo, ls, whether regular bail or anticipatory bail. Ergo, there is no conceptual difference between cancellation of regular bail and there is no conceptual difference between cancellation of regular bail and there is no conceptual difference between cancellation of regular bail and cancellation of anticipatory bail except that a Magistrate will not have cancellation of anticipatory bail except that a Magistrate will not have cancellation of anticipatory bail except that a Magistrate will not have by High Court or statutory power to cancel an anticipatory bail granted by High Court or statutory power to cancel an anticipatory bail granted Sessions Court.

12.2. At this juncture, it would be profitable to consider an issue often At this juncture, it would be profitable to consider an issue often At this juncture, it would be profitable to consider an issue often cancellation springing up before Courts. Petition(s) labelled as plea(s) for “cancellation springing up before Courts. Petition(s) labelled as plea(s) for “ CRM-M- -6185-2026 5 of bail” are filed in Court(s), more often than not, whether such applicant is are filed in Court(s), more often than not, whether such applicant is actually seeking “cancellation of bail” on account of the accused misusing cancellation of bail” on account of the accused misusing the grant of bail or on account of any supervening developments disentitling the grant of bail or on account of any supervening developments disentitling the grant of bail or on account of any supervening developments disentitling such accused to remain on bail OR where the plea raised is that, the bail such accused to remain on bail OR where the plea raised is that, the bail such accused to remain on bail OR where the plea raised is that, the bail been granted at all vide the impugned order, in the factual ought not to have been granted at all vide the impugned order, in the factual been granted at all vide the impugned order, in the factual conspectus of such case. The 1973 Code neither stipulates the words conspectus of such case. The 1973 Code neither stipulates the words conspectus of such case. The 1973 Code neither stipulates the words “cancellation of bail” nor “setting-aside of a bail order” but only stipulates aside of a bail order” but only stipulates the words “any person who has been released on b ail be arrested and any person who has been released on bail be arrested and . There is no gainsaying that there is a foundational committed to custody”. There is no gainsaying that there is a foundational . There is no gainsaying that there is a foundational difference between “cancellation of bail” aside of a bail cancellation of bail” and “setting-aside of a bail order”; a difference which, by way of , can be said to be as stark as ; a difference which, by way of simile, can be said to be as stark as between chalk and cheese. The Hon Ranjit he Hon’ble Supreme Court in cases of Ranjit (supra) has incontestably articulated that Singh (supra) and Neeru Yadav (supra) has incontestably articulated that (supra) has incontestably articulated that “cancellation of bail” is sought is sought is sought for on account of supervening for on account of supervening for on account of supervening tc. whereas circumstances/subsequent developments/misconduct of accused etc. whereas circumstances/subsequent developments/misconduct of accused e is sought for by laying challenge to the said “setting-aside of a bail order” is sought for by laying challenge to the said is sought for by laying challenge to the said bail order on ground of it being perverse or based on irrelevant material(s). bail order on ground of it being perverse or based on irrelevant material(s). bail order on ground of it being perverse or based on irrelevant material(s). The parameters for consideration of the two are, accordingly, different and The parameters for consideration of the two are, accordingly, different and The parameters for consideration of the two are, accordingly, different and contrastive.

#13. The next aspect that craves attention is as to what are the factors The next aspect that craves attention is as to what are the factors The next aspect that craves attention is as to what are the factors relevant for considering of a plea for “cancellation of bail” or “setting-aside relevant for considering of a plea for “ of a bail order.”At the very outset; it deserves to be noted that, it is too far At the very outset; it deserves to be noted that, it is too far At the very outset; it deserves to be noted that, it is too far ciple to be ratiocinated upon, that consideration(s) for well settled a principle to be ratiocinated upon, that consideration(s) for ciple to be ratiocinated upon, that consideration(s) for grant of bail vis.-a-vis. cancellation/setting aside thereof are entirely cancellation/setting-aside thereof are entirely different.

#14. In a plea seeking “cancellation of bail” ; such applicant ought to cancellation of bail”; such applicant ought to rcumstances such as accused show, primarily, subsequent supervening circumstances such as accused show, primarily, subsequent supervening ci having endeavored to influence/intimidate witness(s) or accused having having endeavored to influence/intimidate witness(s) or accused having having endeavored to influence/intimidate witness(s) or accused having violated bail condition(s) or accused having committed another offence(s) or violated bail condition(s) or accused having committed another offence(s) or violated bail condition(s) or accused having committed another offence(s) or accused having secured bail by misrepresenting/concealing material fact(s) accused having secured bail by misrepresenting/concealing material fact(s) accused having secured bail by misrepresenting/concealing material fact(s) il having been granted in ignorance/violation of statutory provisions or bail having been granted in ignorance/violation of statutory provisions il having been granted in ignorance/violation of statutory provisions and factors of akin nature. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of and factors of akin nature. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of and factors of akin nature. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of (supra) has delineated the nature and kind of such Himanshu Sharma (supra) has delineated the nature and kind of such (supra) has delineated the nature and kind of such factors as have been stated by this Court hereinabove. factors as have been stated by this Court hereinab

14.1. Sanjay Gandhi Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sanjay Gandhi Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of (supra) has enounced regarding the nature and degree of burden upon the (supra) has enounced regarding the nature and degree of burden upon the (supra) has enounced regarding the nature and degree of burden upon the applicant (seeking cancellation of bail). The plea of such an applicant has to applicant (seeking cancellation of bail). The plea of such an applicant has to applicant (seeking cancellation of bail). The plea of such an applicant has to & such an applicant be tested on the anvil of preponderance of probabilities & such an applicant be tested on the anvil of preponderance of CRM-M- -6185-2026 6 yond reasonable doubt, the facts pleaded by him is not required to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, the facts pleaded by him yond reasonable doubt, the facts pleaded by him in support of such a plea.

#15. In a plea seeking “setting ; the factors setting-aside of a bail order”; the factors required to be considered are as to whether bail has been granted on required to be considered are as to whether bail has been granted on required to be considered are as to whether bail has been granted on to be evaluated for grant of bail relevant consideration(s); grounds required to be evaluated for grant of bail relevant consideration(s); grounds required have been duly factored into the order granting bail and other factors of akin have been duly factored into the order granting bail and other factors of (supra) has nature. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jagjit Singh (supra) has nature. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of anting held that the High Court or Sessions Court can set-aside an order granting held that the High Court or Sessions Court can set bail passed by an inferior Court if such order is based on irrelevant bail passed by an inferior Court if such order is based on irrelevant bail passed by an inferior Court if such order is based on irrelevant considerations, order granting bail has resulted in miscarriage of justice etc. considerations, order granting bail has resulted in miscarriage of justice etc. considerations, order granting bail has resulted in miscarriage of justice etc. It goes without saying that the High Court or Sessions Court; while dealing a It goes without saying that the High Court or Sessions Court; while dealing a It goes without saying that the High Court or Sessions Court; while dealing a e a bail order; sits in a jurisdiction, which is akin to plea for setting-aside a bail order; sits in a jurisdiction, which is akin to e a bail order; sits in a jurisdiction, which is akin to appellate jurisdiction & hence it can look into the veracity and propriety of appellate jurisdiction & hence it can look into the veracity and propriety of appellate jurisdiction & hence it can look into the veracity and propriety of . However, a Court while the order (granting bail) from all the perspectives. However, a Court while the order (granting bail) from all the tute its own opinion with the one dealing with such a plea, ought not to substitute its own opinion with the one dealing with such a plea, ought not to substi expressed in the impugned order.

#16. down exhaustive It would not be pragmatic to even attempt to lay-down exhaustive It would not be pragmatic to even attempt to lay parameters in this regard as every case, especially a criminal case, is sui parameters in this regard as every case, especially a criminal case, is sui parameters in this regard as every case, especially a criminal case, is sui be avoided as no inexorable generis. Such a quixotic attempt ought to be avoided as no inexorable generis. Such a quixotic attempt ought to formulae can be laid down in this regard. formulae can be laid down in this regard.

#17. As an epilogue to above discussion, the following principles As an epilogue to above discussion, the following principles As an epilogue to above discussion, the following principles emerge: I. (i) There is a conceptual distinction, between (i) There is a conceptual distinction, between “cancellation of bail” ”& “setting-aside of a bail order”. In . In a plea seeking “cancellation of bail” cancellation of bail”; factors required factors required to be considered are akin to be considered are to supervening to supervening circumstances/events or mis-conduct of accused conduct of accused whereas in a plea in a plea seeking“setting-aside of a bail order”; the factors required to be aside of a bail order”; the factors required to be the order in question being unjustified or illegal or considered are akin to the order in question being unjustified or illegal or the order in question being unjustified or illegal or not based on relevant consideration(s). In other words, a plea seeking not based on relevant consideration(s). In other words, a plea seeking not based on relevant consideration(s). In other words, a plea seeking “setting aside of a bail order” is more in the nature of laying challenge to an “setting aside of a bail order” is more in the nature of laying challenge to an “setting aside of a bail order” is more in the nature of laying challenge to an order granting bail before a superior Court upon merits thereof. order granting bail before a superior Court upon me (ii) It would be pragmatic as also desirable, for the cause of ease and It would be pragmatic as also desirable, for the cause of ease and It would be pragmatic as also desirable, for the cause of ease and clarity, that a plea filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., 1973 clearly states as clarity, that a plea filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., 1973 clearly states as clarity, that a plea filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., 1973 clearly states as “cancellation of bail” or for “setting aside of a to whether the plea is for “cancellation of bail” or for “setting aside of a “cancellation of bail” or for “setting aside of a bail order.” or on both accounts. IV. Plea seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail/pre-arrest order Plea seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail/pre CRM-M- -6185-2026 7 (i) A High Court has power to cancel an anticipatory bail granted by A High Court has power to cancel an anticipatory bail granted by A High Court has power to cancel an anticipatory bail granted by it or by a Sessions Court. (ii) A Sessions Court has power to cancel an anticipatory bail granted A Sessions Court has power to cancel an anticipatory bail granted A Sessions Court has power to cancel an anticipatory bail granted However, the Sessions Court can by High Court or earlier granted by it. However, the Sessions Court can by High Court or earlier granted by it. granted by High Court only where the accused has cancel anticipatory bail granted by High Court only where the accused has granted by High Court only where the accused has violated any condition(s) imposed by the High Court (while granting such violated any condition(s) imposed by the High Court (while granting such violated any condition(s) imposed by the High Court (while granting such bail) or on account of such accused having misused liberty granted to him by bail) or on account of such accused having misused liberty granted to him by bail) or on account of such accused having misused liberty granted to him by trial by absenting trying to influence witness(s) or having tried to delay trial by absenting trying to influence witness(s) or having tried to delay himself or having committed another offence(s) while on bail and other himself or having committed another offence(s) while on bail and other himself or having committed another offence(s) while on bail and other factors of akin nature. In other words, a Sessions Court can cancel factors of akin nature. In other words, a Sessions Court can cancel factors of akin nature. In other words, a Sessions Court can cancel anticipatory bail granted to an accused by High Court only on account of anticipatory bail granted to an accused by High Court only on account of anticipatory bail granted to an accused by High Court only on account of ubsequent events but cannot adjudicate upon such likes supervening/subsequent events but cannot adjudicate upon ubsequent events but cannot adjudicate upon veracity of the High Court order (whereby such bail was granted to such veracity of the High Court order (whereby such bail was granted to such veracity of the High Court order (whereby such bail was granted to such accused.) (iii) In case cancellation of an anticipatory bail granted by Sessions In case cancellation of an anticipatory bail granted by Sessions In case cancellation of an anticipatory bail granted by Sessions e Sessions Court is sought for; such plea ought to be filed ordinarily before Sessions Court is sought for; such plea ought to be filed ordinarily befor Court itself. However, since there is concurrent jurisdiction of the High Court itself. However, since there is concurrent jurisdiction of the High Court itself. However, since there is concurrent jurisdiction of the High Court as also Sessions Court in terms of Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. of 1973, Court as also Sessions Court in terms of Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. of 1973, Court as also Sessions Court in terms of Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. of 1973, the filing of such a plea straight away before the High Court is not barred. the filing of such a plea straight away before the High Court is not barred. the filing of such a plea straight away before the High Court is not barred. , it would be expedient that such a plea (straight away filed At the same time, it would be expedient that such a plea (straight away filed , it would be expedient that such a plea (straight away filed before High Court) must show cogent reasons for not approaching the before High Court) must show cogent reasons for not approaching the before High Court) must show cogent reasons for not approaching the Sessions Court in first instance. (iv) The factors for consideration in a plea for cancellation of an The factors for consideration in a plea for cancellation of an The factors for consideration in a plea for cancellation of an r the accused has misused liberty granted to him anticipatory bail are whether the accused has misused liberty granted to him r the accused has misused liberty granted to him by trying to influence witness(s) or has tried to delay trial or has committed by trying to influence witness(s) or has tried to delay trial or has committed by trying to influence witness(s) or has tried to delay trial or has committed another offence(s) while on bail, whether accused has flouted the another offence(s) while on bail, whether accused has flouted the another offence(s) while on bail, whether accused has flouted the tation or cancellation of bail, whether bail was procured by misrepresentation or cancellation of bail, whether bail was procured by misrepresen fraud or concealing relevant material, and similar factors of akin nature. fraud or concealing relevant material, and similar factors of akin nature. fraud or concealing relevant material, and similar factors of akin nature. There is no gainsaying that above factors are only illustrative in nature as it There is no gainsaying that above factors are only illustrative in nature as it There is no gainsaying that above factors are only illustrative in nature as it is not axiomatic to exhaustively enumerate them. is not axiomatic to exhaustively enumerate them. (v) bail has been granted on Where such plea raises ground(s) that bail has been granted on Where such plea raises ground(s) that account of misrepresentation of facts or a fraud having been played on Court account of misrepresentation of facts or a fraud having been played on Court account of misrepresentation of facts or a fraud having been played on Court which has granted bail or concealment of material/relevant facts; it would be which has granted bail or concealment of material/relevant facts; it would be which has granted bail or concealment of material/relevant facts; it would be Court expedient that such plea be filed, in the first instance itself, before the Court expedient that such plea be filed, in the first instance itself, before the which had granted bail in question. (vi) The degree and nature of proof required to be shown by an The degree and nature of proof required to be shown by an The degree and nature of proof required to be shown by an applicant (seeking cancellation of an anticipatory bail) applicant (seeking cancellation of an anticipatory bail) applicant (seeking cancellation of an anticipatory bail) that of that of that of preponderance of probabilities and not one of being beyond reasonable preponderance of probabilities and not one of being beyond reasonable preponderance of probabilities and not one of being beyond reasonable doubt. CRM-M- -6185-2026 8 eking setting aside of an anticipatory bail/pre-arrest bail order V. Plea seeking setting aside of an anticipatory bail/pre (i) arrest bail A plea seeking setting aside of an anticipatory bail/pre-arrest bail A plea seeking setting aside of an anticipatory bail/pre order by a Sessions Court has to be essentially filed before High Court. order by a Sessions Court has to be essentially filed before High Court. (ii) The factor, required to be considered in a plea seeking setting The factor, required to be considered in a plea seeking setting The factor, required to be considered in a plea seeking setting arrest bail order; is as to whether the impugned aside of an anticipatory/pre-arrest bail order; is as to whether the impugned arrest bail order; is as to whether the impugned arrest bail) has objectively dealt with order (granting anticipatory bail/pre-arrest bail) has objectively dealt with order (granting anticipatory bail/pre ainst accused, role of accused in the nature and gravity of allegations against accused, role of accused in the nature and gravity of allegations ag crime(s) alleged, need for custodial interrogation, likelihood of accused crime(s) alleged, need for custodial interrogation, likelihood of accused crime(s) alleged, need for custodial interrogation, likelihood of accused influencing the investigation/witnesses, likelihood of the accused absconding influencing the investigation/witnesses, likelihood of the accused absconding influencing the investigation/witnesses, likelihood of the accused absconding from process of justice etc. VI. n 439(2) of Cr.P.C. 1973 Where a plea made under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. 1973 Where a plea made under Sectio raises grounds regarding “cancellation of bail” as also for “setting aside of raises grounds regarding “cancellation of bail” as also for “setting aside of raises grounds regarding “cancellation of bail” as also for “setting aside of bail order”, such plea has to be essentially made before the superior Court. bail order”, such plea has to be essentially made before the superior Court. bail order”, such plea has to be essentially made before the superior Court.

#8. The averments made in the petition as also the arguments The averments made in the petition as also the arguments The averments made in the petition as also the arguments arned counsel for the petitioner, indubitably, show that petition raised by learned counsel for the petitioner, indubitably, show that petition arned counsel for the petitioner, indubitably, show that petition raised by le has been filed for cancellation of the anticipatory bail order granted to the has been filed for cancellation of the anticipatory bail order granted to the has been filed for cancellation of the anticipatory bail order granted to the has been filed for cancellation of the anticipatory bail order granted to the respondent No.2 vide order dated 19.01.2026 respondent No.2 vide order dated 4) passed by 19.01.2026 (Annexure P-4) passed by Sessions Judge, Ferozepur. In the present c Sessions Judge, ase, the petitioner has not In the present case, the petitioner has not brought on record any material to demonstrate that after the grant of brought on record any material to demonstrate that after the grant of brought on record any material to demonstrate that after the grant of brought on record any material to demonstrate that after the grant of espondent No.2 has attempted to influence witnesses, anticipatory bail, respondent No.2 has attempted to influence witnesses, espondent No.2 has attempted to influence witnesses, anticipatory bail, tamper with evidence, evade investigation or violate any condition imposed tamper with evidence, evade investigation or violate any condition imposed tamper with evidence, evade investigation or violate any condition imposed tamper with evidence, evade investigation or violate any condition imposed rt. The apprehensions expressed by the petitioner are largely by the Court. The apprehensions expressed by the petitioner are largely rt. The apprehensions expressed by the petitioner are largely by the Cou speculative and not supported by any cogent speculative and not supported by of the any cogent material. The argument of the petitioner regarding gravity of the offence and the hazardous nature of petitioner regarding gravity of the offence and the hazardous nature of petitioner regarding gravity of the offence and the hazardous nature of petitioner regarding gravity of the offence and the hazardous nature of spurious liquor cannot be a ground for cancellat spurious liquor ion of bail once it has been cannot be a ground for cancellation of bail once it has been In the granted particularly in the absence of any supervening circumstances. In the granted particularly in the absence of any supervening circumstances. granted particularly in the absence of any supervening circumstances. present case, anticipatory bail was initially granted on 29.10.2025 and present case, anticipatory bail was initially granted on 29.10. present case, anticipatory bail was initially granted on 29.10. subsequently made absolute vide order dated 19.01.2026 after the State subsequently made absolute vide order dated 19.01.2026 after the State subsequently made absolute vide order dated 19.01.2026 after the State subsequently made absolute vide order dated 19.01.2026 after the State informed the Court that respondent No.2 was not required for itself informed the Court that respondent No.2 was not required for informed the Court that respondent No.2 was not required for informed the Court that respondent No.2 was not required for CRM-M- -6185-2026 9 custodial interrogation. At the stage of consideration of anticipatory custodial interrogation. bail, the consideration of anticipatory bail, the Court is not required to conclusively determine culpability or conduct a Court is not required to conclusively determine culpability or conduct a Court is not required to conclusively determine culpability or conduct a Court is not required to conclusively determine culpability or conduct a detailed examination of evidence. If the detailed examination of evidence. petitioner is aggrieved by the If the petitioner is aggrieved by the manner of investigation, appropriate remedies are available under law; manner of investigation, appropriate remedies are available under law; manner of investigation, appropriate remedies are available under law; manner of investigation, appropriate remedies are available under law; however, such grievances cannot automatically result in cancellation of bail however, such grievances cannot automatically result in cancellation of bail however, such grievances cannot automatically result in cancellation of bail however, such grievances cannot automatically result in cancellation of bail already granted. It is worthwhile to note herein that already granted. espondent No.2 has It is worthwhile to note herein that respondent No.2 has ned investigation pursuant to the bail order and that the prosecution has joined investigation pursuant to the bail order and that the prosecution has ned investigation pursuant to the bail order and that the prosecution has ned investigation pursuant to the bail order and that the prosecution has It is conceded position not sought cancellation of bail on this ground. It is conceded position not sought cancellation of bail on this ground. not sought cancellation of bail on this ground. and the before this Court that the FIR was registered on 18.10.2025 and the before this Court that the FIR was registered on before this Court that the FIR was registered on cooperation or attempt by investigating agency has not reported any non-cooperation or attempt by investigating agency has not reported any investigating agency has not reported any respondent No.2 to interfere with the investigation. It is trite law that the respondent No.2 to interfere with the investigation. It is trite law that the respondent No.2 to interfere with the investigation. It is trite law that the respondent No.2 to interfere with the investigation. It is trite law that the consideration(s) for grant of bail and for cancellation of bail are distinct. consideration(s) for grant of bail and for cancellation of bail are distinct. consideration(s) for grant of bail and for cancellation of bail are distinct. consideration(s) for grant of bail and for cancellation of bail are distinct. Cancellation of bail already granted requires demonstration of supervening Cancellation of bail already granted requires demonstration of superv Cancellation of bail already granted requires demonstration of superv circumstances such as misuse of liberty, tampering with evidence, circumstances such as misuse of liberty, tampering with evidence, circumstances such as misuse of liberty, tampering with evidence, circumstances such as misuse of liberty, tampering with evidence, intimidation of witnesses or deliberate evasion of the judicial process. Mere intimidation of witnesses or deliberate evasion of the judicial process. Mere intimidation of witnesses or deliberate evasion of the judicial process. Mere intimidation of witnesses or deliberate evasion of the judicial process. Mere dissatisfaction with the reasoning of the Court below which has granted the dissatisfaction with the reasoning of the Court below which has granted the dissatisfaction with the reasoning of the Court below which has granted the dissatisfaction with the reasoning of the Court below which has granted the offence, by itself, is not sufficient to recall bail or the seriousness of the offence, by itself, is not sufficient to recall offence, by itself, is not sufficient to recall bail or the seriousness of the such an order. Learned counsel has laid much emphasis that the allegations such an order. Learned counsel has laid much emphasis that the allegations such an order. Learned counsel has laid much emphasis that the allegations such an order. Learned counsel has laid much emphasis that the allegations against the respondent No.2 are serious, which according to the petitioner, against the respondent No.2 are serious, which according to the petitioner, against the respondent No.2 are serious, which according to the petitioner, against the respondent No.2 are serious, which according to the petitioner, the time of grant of ought not to have been considered by the Court below at the time of grant of ought not to have been considered by the Court below at ought not to have been considered by the Court below at anticipatory bail. In the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioner has anticipatory bail. In the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioner has anticipatory bail. In the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioner has anticipatory bail. In the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioner has not brought any fresh or supervening material before this Court. A mere not brought any fresh or supervening material before this Court. A mere not brought any fresh or supervening material before this Court. A mere not brought any fresh or supervening material before this Court. A mere allegation of seriousness of offence without concrete material cannot justify allegation of seriousness of offence without concrete material cannot justify allegation of seriousness of offence without concrete material cannot justify allegation of seriousness of offence without concrete material cannot justify cancellation of bail. Moreover, such a plea cannot, by itself, render the the cancellation of bail. Moreover, such a plea cannot, by itself, render the cancellation of bail. Moreover, such a plea cannot, by itself, render the cancellation of bail. Moreover, such a plea cannot, by itself, render the order granting the bail perverse. The order passed by the Sessions Court is a order granting the bail perverse. The order passed by the Sessions Court is a order granting the bail perverse. The order passed by the Sessions Court is a order granting the bail perverse. The order passed by the Sessions Court is a CRM-M- -6185-2026 10 reasoned speaking order and cannot be said to be suffering from vice well-reasoned speaking order and cannot be said to be suffering from vice reasoned speaking order and cannot be said to be suffering from vice reasoned speaking order and cannot be said to be suffering from vice of non-application of judicia l mind. This Court, keeping in view the application of judicial mind. This Court, keeping in view the l mind. This Court, keeping in view the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case(s) in hand, does not find entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case(s) in hand, does not find entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case(s) in hand, does not find entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case(s) in hand, does not find any good ground to hold that the Sessions Court, while passing the any good ground to hold that the Sessions Court, while passing the any good ground to hold that the Sessions Court, while passing the any good ground to hold that the Sessions Court, while passing the impugned order, has overstepped its jurisdiction or has not exercised impugned order, has overstepped its jurisdiction or has not exercised impugned order, has overstepped its jurisdiction or has not exercised same in right perspective. Therefore, the petition(s) in hand deserves same in right perspective. Therefore, the petition(s) in hand deserves same in right perspective. Therefore, the petition(s) in hand deserves same in right perspective. Therefore, the petition(s) in hand deserves rejection. rejection.

#9. Keeping in view the entirety of the facts and circumstances of Keeping in view the entirety of the facts and circumstances of Keeping in view the entirety of the facts and circumstances of aside the anticipatory bail the case in hand, no ground is made out to set-aside the anticipatory bail the case in hand, no ground is made out to set the case in hand, no ground is made out to set dent No.2 vide the impugned order. Therefore, the earlier granted to respondent No.2 vide the impugned order. Therefore, the dent No.2 vide the impugned order. Therefore, the earlier granted to respon petition in hand deserves rejection. petition in hand deserves rejection.

#10. As a sequel to the above discussion, the present petition filed As a sequel to the above discussion, the present petition filed As a sequel to the above discussion, the present petition filed under Section 483(3) of the BNSS, 2023, seeking cancellation under Section 483(3) of the BNSS, 2023, seeking under Section 483(3) of the BNSS, 2023, seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail order dated 19.01.2026 anticipatory bail order dated ssed by learned (Annexure P-4) passed by learned Sessions Judge, Ferozepur is dismissed. Sessions Judge, Ferozepur

#11. It, It, It, indubitably, goes without saying indubitably, goes without saying indubitably, goes without saying that nothing said that nothing said that nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

#12. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE April 27, Ajay 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: Yes/No Yes/No