JUDGMENT : ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J. Heard the parties. 2. Though notice has validly been served upon the opposite party Nos.2 to 6 yet no one turns up on behalf of the opposite party Nos.2 to 6 in spite of repeated calls. 3. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with a prayer to quash the order dated 14.06.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Hazaribagh in Anticipatory Bail Petition No.573 of 2024 in connection with Korrah P.S. Case No.49 of 2024 whereby and where under the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Hazaribagh has granted the privileges of anticipatory bail to the opposite party Nos.2 to 6 of this case involving the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 324, 325, 307, 295A, 379, 354, 427, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. 4. The brief fact of the case is that the opposite party Nos.2 to 6 of this case who were the accused persons of the said Korrah P.S. Case No.49 of 2024, filed Anticipatory Bail Petition No.573 of 2024 which was taken up for hearing on 14.06.2024 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Hazaribagh. The learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Hazaribagh considered the fact that the victim whose statement was appearing in para-17 of the case-diary, has not uttered a single word, regarding any kind of molestation by the opposite party Nos.2 to 6 of the instant Cr.M.P. There was no medical report filed by the prosecution with the case-diary to show the nature of injury sustained by the alleged victim even after repeated directions given by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Hazaribagh. It was contended before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Hazaribagh that the opposite party Nos.2 to 6 have falsely been implicated in this case because of land dispute. Considering the aforesaid facts, the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Hazaribagh granted the privileges of anticipatory bail to the opposite party Nos.2 to 6. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Hazaribagh has committed a grave illegality by granting the privileges of anticipatory bail to the private- opposite party Nos.2 to 6 in a case involving the serious offence like the one punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Hazaribagh has committed a grave illegality by granting the privileges of anticipatory bail to the private- opposite party Nos.2 to 6 in a case involving the serious offence like the one punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. It is next submitted that the consideration of the anticipatory bail application without the medical report being furnished, is perverse. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer, as prayed for in the instant Cr.M.P., be allowed. 6. Learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer of the petitioner made in the instant Cr.M.P. and submit that the medical report furnished by the opposite party Nos.2 to 6 shows that none of the victim has sustained any grievous injury and the injury sustained by the victim appears to be superficial in nature which is highly unlikely in a case of any serious assault with sword with full force; as had that been the case, there ought to have been some grievous injury. Hence, it is submitted that the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Hazaribagh, has not committed any illegality in granting the privileges of anticipatory bail to the opposite party Nos.2 to 6 of the instant Cr.M.P. It is next submitted that though the opposite party Nos.2 to 6 have been granted the privileges of anticipatory bail for a period of little less than one year, there is no allegation against them of committing any misuse of bail. Therefore, it is submitted that under such circumstances, this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed. 7. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that the anticipatory bail granted by an inferior court can be set aside by a superior court if the order granting bail is premised on material that is irrelevant or an unreasoned one or there is any perversity in the order concerned; as has been observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of P v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Anr. (2022) 15 SCR 211 , para-24 of which reads as under: 24. (2022) 15 SCR 211 , para-24 of which reads as under: 24. As can be discerned from the above decisions, for cancelling bail once granted, the court must consider whether any supervening circumstances have arisen or the conduct of the Accused post grant of bail demonstrates that it is no longer conducive to a fair trial to permit him to retain his freedom by enjoying the concession of bail during trial [Dolat Ram v. State of Haryana, MANU/SC/0547/1995 : (1995) 1 SCC 349 : 1995 SCC (Cri) 237]. To put it differently, in ordinary circumstances, this Court would be loathe to interfere with an order passed by the court below granting bail but if such an order is found to be illegal or perverse or premised on material that is irrelevant, then such an order is susceptible to scrutiny and interference by the appellate court xxxX”. (Emphasis supplied) 8. The undisputed fact remains that none of the allegedly injured persons have sustained any grievous injury. The victim, in her statement recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which has been mentioned in para-17 of the case-diary, has not uttered a single word regarding any kind of molestation. The contention of the private opposite parties Nos.2 to 6 that there was land dispute between the petitioner and the private opposite parties Nos.2 to 6 is not disputed. 9. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Hazaribagh vide order dated 14.06.2024 passed in Anticipatory Bail Petition No.573 of 2024 in connection with Korrah P.S. Case No.49 of 2024, has not committed any illegality in granting the privileges of anticipatory bail to the opposite party Nos.2 to 6 and the order dated 14.06.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Hazaribagh in Anticipatory Bail Petition No.573 of 2024 in connection with Korrah P.S. Case No.49 of 2024, being not premised on irrelevant facts nor unreasoned nor perverse, moreover, the offence cannot be termed as serious one, does not warrant interference of this Court in exercise of the power of this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 10. Accordingly, this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, is dismissed.