ORDER : 1. Leave granted. Heard the counsel. 2. In pursuance of a complaint under Section 498A, 379 and 323/34 of Indian Penal Code by the second respondent (wife), the appellant (husband) was arrested on 11.8.2006. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Patna, by order dated 30.11.2006, granted provisional bail for a period of one month so that the matter of reconciliation between the parties could take place, as appellant had inter alia submitted that he was willing to maintain his wife with dignity. Thereafter, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, by order dated 7.5.2007, confirmed the provisional bail earlier granted. While so doing, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge also noted the submission of the appellant that on release from jail on 3.12.2006, he alongwith his brother-in-law went to the house of his wife on 7.5.2007 but his wife's brother and father abused and assaulted him and, therefore, he had filed an informatory petition before ACJM, Danapur on 8.12.2006. He stated that his attempt to reconcile with his wife was frustrated by his brother-in-law and father- in-law. 3. Thereafter, the second respondent-wife filed an application for cancellation of bail. Learned Sessions Judge, by order dated 12.9.2007, rejected the said application as no ground was made out for cancelling the bail. That was challenged by the wife in a revision petition before the High Court. The High Court, by impugned order dated 15.12.2008, cancelled the bail granted to the appellant and directed him to surrender before the Court within 10 days. The only reason given by the High Court for cancelling the bail was that during the course of hearing it had directed both the parties to appear before the Court and when both parties appeared and efforts were made for reconciliation, the appellant herein had refused to accept the wife. The High Court, thereafore, inferred that appellant had obtained bail by making false and wrong submissions. The said order is under challenge in this appeal by special leave. 4. We have carefully examined the matter. None of the grounds on which the bail can be cancelled are made out. The appellant had given reason for the failure of attempts of reconciliation and that were noted while confirming the provisional bail. The said order is under challenge in this appeal by special leave. 4. We have carefully examined the matter. None of the grounds on which the bail can be cancelled are made out. The appellant had given reason for the failure of attempts of reconciliation and that were noted while confirming the provisional bail. The fact that during subsequent reconciliation efforts on 15.12.2008, he refused to take back the wife, cannot give rise to an inference that he obtained the provisional bail by false and wrong submissions. 5. The appeal is, therefore, allowed. The impugned order of the High Court is set aside and the order of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge rejecting the application forcancellation of bail stands restored.