The Allahabad High Court in the case XYZ vs. State of UP and another observed and has stated that the bail granted to an accused should not be cancelled on the basis of an application filed claiming that the accused is continuously threatening the applicant, informant after his or her release on bail. The bench headed by Justice Sameer Jain in the case observed and has reasoned that if based on such an application, the bail granted to the accused is cancelled, then it would open a Pandora’s box and endless litigation would start between both parties. Adding to it, the court stated that it is easy to reject a bail application but it is very difficult to cancel the bail already granted and for cancellation, very cogent and overwhelming reasons must be present. In the present case, the court made the said observations while dismissing the bail cancellation application filed on behalf of the applicant seeking cancellation of bail granted to opposite party no.2/accused vide order June 8, 2023, in a case under section 376, section 323, section 504, section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Therefore, it was also stated that the contention of the informant in the instant bail cancellation application that the accused/opposite party no. 2 is continuously threatening her and the application was moved before the higher authorities on September 02, 2023, and when no such action was taken against him, then she had filed an application under Section 156 (3) CrPC which is still pending. The AGA appearing for the state submitted before the court while supporting the bail cancellation plea that that as per the application moved by the applicant, it appears that after release on bail, the accused is continuously threatening her and therefore, it appears that he has misused the liberty of bail granted to him. The court stated while rejecting the bail cancellation plea that while it being easy to reject the bail application, it is very difficult to cancel the bail already granted and for cancellation, very cogent and overwhelming reasons must be present which are missing in the present matter.Accordingly, the court rejected the bail cancellation application.