Cancellation of bail requires cogent material of misuse or supervening circumstances; mere further investigation is not enough.

Cancellation of bail is a drastic interference with personal liberty and requires cogent material showing misuse of liberty, tampering with evidence, absconding risk, interference with investigation, or other supervening circumstances. On the facts, the accused had complied with bail conditions, appeared when called, cooperated with investigation, travelled abroad only with permission, returned as directed, and no material showed evasion of process or interference with evidence. The prior bail order was reasoned, and no relevant circumstance was shown to justify recall of bail. The request was therefore treated as an attempt to re-examine the original bail order rather than establish recognised grounds for cancellation, and it was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the bail granted to the accused was liable to be cancelled for breach of conditions, supervening circumstances, or perversity in the bail order.

Analysis: Cancellation of bail is a drastic interference with personal liberty and is not to be ordered mechanically. It requires cogent material showing misuse of liberty, interference with investigation, tampering with evidence, absconding risk, or other compelling circumstances. On the record, the accused had complied with the conditions imposed, appeared when called, cooperated with investigation, travelled abroad only with permission, returned in compliance with directions, and had not been shown to have tampered with evidence or attempted to evade process. The prior bail order was reasoned, and no relevant material was shown to have been ignored or any supervening event established that would justify recall of bail. The request effectively sought re-examination of the original bail order rather than cancellation on recognised grounds.

Conclusion: The application for cancellation of bail was not made out and was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Bail once granted can be cancelled only on cogent material showing supervening circumstances or other recognised grounds such as misuse of liberty, and not merely because further investigation or custodial interrogation is sought.

---