Dheeraj Tyagi vs. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
Background
The petitioner had been granted anticipatory bail (and later regular bail) in a cheating case based on a mediation settlement under which he was to pay Rs. 80 lakh and later execute registered sale deeds to the complainants. He repeatedly failed to honour his undertakings: a settlement cheque bounced, he failed to appear in court despite directions, and he did not execute a further undertaking he gave in June 2026 to transfer land. A Sessions Court eventually cancelled his bail. He challenged this, arguing (among other things) that only the Magistrate who originally granted bail could cancel it.
Decision Breakdown
The High Court upheld the bail cancellation. It held that the Sessions Court, as a superior court, had concurrent jurisdiction to cancel bail granted by a Magistrate under Section 439(2) CrPC/Section 483(3) BNSS, relying on Supreme Court precedent (Gurcharan Singh v. State). On the merits, the Court found the petitioner had repeatedly broken his settlement promises to the court itself, not merely to the complainant, including failing to appear despite specific directions and offering a "lame excuse" (a traffic jam) for non-appearance. This pattern, the Court held, amounted to abuse of the court's process, justifying cancellation regardless of whether bail cancellation can generally be used just to recover money.
Lesson Learnt
Bail obtained on the strength of a settlement can be cancelled if the accused repeatedly breaks promises made directly to the court (not just to the other party): courts treat broken undertakings to the court itself as a serious abuse of process distinct from simple non-payment of a settlement amount.