JUDGMENT Mrs. Sabina, J.:- This petition has been filed under Section 439 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for cancellation of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 83 dated 4.4.2008, under Sections 406/ 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Sadar Sunam District Sangrur. 2. On 20.2.2009, the following order was passed by this Court on a bail application filed by respondent No.2:- “Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail to him in case FIR No.83 dated 4.4.2008 under Sections 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (`IPC’ for short) registered at Police Station Sadar Sunam. 3. At the time of issuance of notice of motion dated 9.5.2008, the following order passed:- “Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the present case the dispute arose between the parties on the very first day after marriage. The marriage took place on 3.12.2007. The allegations are that the moment the daughter of the complainant came, a demand of dowry was raised. It is a case of non compatibility. The father of the petitioner was arrested and has been released on regular bail. The dowry articles have been recovered by the police, some of them were lying in the packed condition at the place of Bichola and some were even lying with the complainant. Notice of motion to Advocate General, Punjab for 1.8.2008. In the meantime, in case of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer. He shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called upon for investigation. He shall also be bound by all the conditions as contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.” Vide order dated 5.12.2008, the case was ordered to be listed before Mediation and Conciliation Centre. During mediation proceedings on 6.1.2009, parties agreed to live together peacefully. Learned counsel for the State who is assisted by HC Bhant Singh and counsel for the complainant has submitted that now the complainant is residing in the house of the petitioner. Accordingly, interim bail granted by this Court on 9.5.2009 is made absolute. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that now the offence under Section 406 IPC has also been added in the FIR. The Registry is directed to make necessary addition in the head note of the petition in this regard.” 4. Accordingly, interim bail granted by this Court on 9.5.2009 is made absolute. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that now the offence under Section 406 IPC has also been added in the FIR. The Registry is directed to make necessary addition in the head note of the petition in this regard.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the bail had been granted only because the matter had been compromised. 5. Learned State counsel has submitted that respondent No.2 has since been allowed regular bail by the trial Court and the case is now listed for prosecution evidence after framing of the charge. 6. Keeping in view the fact that now respondent No.2 has been released on regular bail and charge has been framed against him by the trial Court and the case is listed for prosecution evidence, no ground for cancellation of bail is made out. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. ------------