(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to the respondents 2 to 6 by order dated 08.04.2024 in Crl.OP.No.1827 of 2024.)

1. This petition has been filed by the defacto complainant seeking cancellation of bail to the respondents 2 to 6 granted by this Court in Crl.OP.No.1827 of 2024 dated 08.04.2024.

2. Earlier, this Court granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Crl.OP. No.1827 of 2024 dated 08.04.2024 to the respondents 2 to 6 with the following conditions.

                   (a) the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Court concerned may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

                   [b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation.

                   [c] the first petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs.12,000/- (Rupees Twelve Thousand only) as interim maintenance to his wife on the first week of every month of English Calendar from May 2024 onwards until modified by the Court of law.

                   [d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

                   [e] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

                   [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];

                   [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

3. In the earlier order, in condition no.6(c) it is clearly stated that the second respondent herein shall pay a sum of Rs.12,000/- (Rupees Twelve Thousand only) as interim maintenance to his wife/petitioner during the first week of every English calendar month, commencing from May 2024, until the said order is modified by a Court of law. Admittedly, so far, no petition seeking modification of the said condition has been filed by the respondents 2 to 6.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that since Condition No.6(c) has been violated by the second respondent, the anticipatory bail granted to him is liable to be cancelled. Hence, he prayed for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.

5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 to 6 submitted that the petitioner herein has married with another person and, therefore, she is not entitled to avail the benefit of interim maintenance as ordered by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.1827 of 2024, in paragraph 6(c). He further submitted that the condition imposed upon the second respondent to pay interim maintenance is unsustainable and, therefore, he opposed the prayer for cancellation of anticipatory bail.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents and perused the materials available on record.

7. Admittedly, this Court, by order dated 08.04.2024, granted anticipatory bail to the respondents subject to the conditions prescribed in paragraph 6(c). It is not in dispute that the respondents have not complied with the said condition, and the specific case of the petitioner is that no amount has been paid to her so far. In the absence of any modification or suspension of the said condition by this Court or by any other competent authority, the respondents 2 to 6, having availed the benefit of anticipatory bail, are bound to strictly comply with the conditions imposed. Failure to do so amounts to a clear violation of the bail condition and constitutes a valid ground for cancellation of bail.

8. The respondents 2 to 6 contended that the petitioner has married another person and that the same would constitute a valid ground for seeking modification of the condition imposed. However, admittedly, no petition seeking for modification of the bail condition has been filed before this Court. Further, though the anticipatory bail was granted as early as on 08.04.2024, the present petition seeking cancellation of bail has been filed after a lapse of nearly one and a half years. This Court is of the considered view that the respondents, particularly the second respondent, have clearly violated the condition imposed by this Court.

9. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail granted to the second respondent / Logeshwaran is hereby cancelled, while the anticipatory bail granted to respondents 3 to 6 shall remain undisturbed.

10. In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is allowed insofar as the second respondent is concerned, and relief against other respondents petition is dismissed.