Bail cancellation turns on gravity, investigation material, and risk of tampering with evidence in serious offences.

Bail granted in a grave offence must be tested against the seriousness of the allegations, the material collected during investigation, the recorded statements under Section 161 CrPC, the risk of tampering with evidence, and the need to secure the accused's presence at trial. Where the order does not show that these relevant factors were properly weighed, the approach is erroneous. The bail order was quashed and the accused was directed to be taken into custody forthwith.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order granting bail deserved to be cancelled for failure to consider the gravity of the offence, the material collected during investigation, and the likelihood of tampering with evidence or non-availability of the accused during trial.

Analysis: Bail granted by the High Court in a grave offence, where a chargesheet had already been filed and statements recorded during investigation implicated the accused, was required to be assessed on the basis of all relevant material. The relevant considerations included the seriousness of the offence, the evidence collected under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the possibility of interference with evidence, and securing the accused's presence during trial. The impugned order did not show that these factors had been properly weighed, and the approach adopted was held to be erroneous.

Conclusion: The bail order was quashed and the accused was directed to be taken into custody forthwith.

---