Bail cancellation requires legal error or improper exercise of discretion; High Court interference was unjustified here.

Interference with a bail order is unwarranted where the Trial Court has exercised discretion on relevant considerations and no legal error or improper principle is shown. The Trial Court granted bail after the charge-sheet was filed, taking into account the nature of the offence and the bail already granted to a co-accused. The SC held that the High Court's cancellation of bail, immediate arrest direction, and call for an explanation from the Trial Judge were wholly disproportionate and unjustified. The bail order was restored, the cancellation application was dismissed, and the appellant's bail stood confirmed on the Trial Court's terms.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in cancelling the bail granted by the Trial Court and directing arrest of the appellant, and in calling for an explanation from the Trial Judge.

Analysis: After the earlier rejection of bail, liberty had been granted to move a fresh application after a reasonable time. The charge-sheet had since been filed under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the Trial Court granted bail considering the nature of the offence, the filing of the charge-sheet, and the fact that the other accused had been granted bail. The High Court's interference, together with the direction to arrest the appellant immediately and seek an explanation from the Trial Judge, was found to be wholly disproportionate and unwarranted. The order of the Trial Court did not disclose any application of wrong legal principles, and the exercise of discretion was held to be proper.

Conclusion: The cancellation of bail by the High Court was unjustified, and the appellant was entitled to have the bail order restored and confirmed.

Final Conclusion: The High Court's order cancelling bail was set aside, the cancellation application was dismissed, and the appellant's bail stood confirmed on the terms imposed by the Trial Court.

Ratio Decidendi: Interference with a bail order is not warranted where the Trial Court has exercised its discretion on relevant considerations and no legal error or improper principle is shown; punitive directions against the trial judge are impermissible absent justification.

---