ORDER : This petition is filed by the petitioner/complainant under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C, praying this Court to cancel the bail granted to respondent No.2/accused No.1 by this Court vide order dated 16.02.2015 in Crl.P.No.151/2015 pertaining to Crime No. 305/2014 of Srirangapatna Police Station, which is now pending on the file of the III Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Mandya in S.C.No.5109/2014. 2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/complainant so also the arguments of the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1- State and learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2/accused No.1. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner made the submission that in the bail order granted by this Court, there was conditions imposed by this Court that he should not tamper with the witnesses or evidence; should not indulge in any or similar offences and if violation of any condition, the respondent-State can move for cancellation of the bail, as per the condition Nos.(ii), (iii) and (v) of the said bail order. It is further submitted that subsequent to the said bail order, he involved in 2-3 other crimes and committed the alleged offences and also he is a rowdy sheeter as mentioned by the prosecutor in the remand application. Therefore, bail order granted by this Court and the conditions imposed in the said bail order have been violated by the respondent No.2/accused No.1 and the same has to be cancelled. 4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader, also made the submission that there is clear violation of the conditions of the bail order. Hence, the bail order granted in favour of respondent No.2/accused No.1 has to be cancelled. 5. Learned counsel representing respondent No.2/accused No.1 made the submission that bail order granted in a case pertaining to the offence under Section 307 IPC, wherein the trial is concluded, now the matter is posted for hearing the arguments. Therefore, question of cancellation of bail order on the allegations made in the petition does not arise at all. Learned counsel submitted that false case have been booked against the respondent No.2/accused No.1. Hence, petitioner has not made out the case for cancellation of the bail order. Accordingly, he submitted to dismiss the petition. 6. Therefore, question of cancellation of bail order on the allegations made in the petition does not arise at all. Learned counsel submitted that false case have been booked against the respondent No.2/accused No.1. Hence, petitioner has not made out the case for cancellation of the bail order. Accordingly, he submitted to dismiss the petition. 6. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record, so also the bail order dated 16.02.2015 passed by this Court in Crl.P.No.151/2015, wherein bail was granted by allowing the petition. The condition Nos. (ii), (iii) & (v) reads thus:- “(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with the witnesses or evidence. (iii) The petitioner shall not indulge in any or similar offences. (v) If the petitioner violates any condition, the respondent-State can move for cancellation of the bail.” 7. Now, it is the contention of the petitioner/complainant herein that subsequent to the said bail order, respondent No.2/accused No.1 herein involved in Cr.No.431/2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 341, 354A, 506 r/w 149 of IPC. He is also involved in another Cr.No.278/2017, wherein the younger brother of the deceased Nagesh is the complainant and thus has committed alleged offence under Section 307 of IPC. So also the materials goes to show that there is one more crime came to be registered against the respondent No.2/accused No.1 herein in Cr.No.232/2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 323, 324, 506 r/w 34 of IPC. 8. Looking to these materials and also in the remand application filed by the prosecution, it is mentioned that a rowdy sheet has been opened in respect of respondent No.2/accused No.1 herein. It is also mentioned in the remand application that he was having enemity towards the complainant and the persons on the side of the complainant. Further, there are also other crimes which have been registered subsequent to granting of bail order. 9. Hence, looking to these materials placed by the petitioner/complainant herein, the petitioner has placed the materials to show that there is clear violation of the conditions of the bail order. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The bail order granted by this Court vide order dated 16.02.2015 pertaining to Cr.No.305/2014 of the Srirangapatna Police Station in Crl.P.No.151/2015 is hereby cancelled and the concerned Court is directed to take the respondent No.2/accused No.1 into custody immediately.