Allahabad High Court
Ashvani Kumar Singh vs State Of U.P. on 28 February, 2023
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46648 of 2022
Applicant :- Ashvani Kumar Singh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Shanker Pandey,Neha Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shashank Kumar
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the record.
By means of this application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., applicant Ashvani Kumar Singh, who is involved in Case Crime No. 156 of 2022, under Sections 306 IPC, Police Station Nagra, District Ballia, seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial.
At the outset, learned Additional Government Advocate pointed out that in paragraph no. 16 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application, it is mentioned that as per the best knowledge of the deponent, there is no criminal history of the applicant whereas apart from this case, applicant has criminal history of following four cases:-
(i) Case Crime No. 169 of 2018, under Sections 41, 411, 413, 414 IPC, Police Station Nagra, District Ballia.
(ii) Case Crime No. 134 of 2018, under Sections 41, 411, 413, 414 IPC, Police Station Nagra, District Ballia.
(iii) Case Crime No. 132 of 2018, under Sections 379, 411 IPC, Police Station Nagra, District Ballia.
(iv) Case Crime No. 125 of 2020, under Sections 3/25 IPC, Police Station Nagra, District Ballia.
On putting query, learned counsel for the applicant could not dispute the aforesaid submission of learned A.G.A. and submits that deponent of this case is brother of the applicant and he was not aware about criminal history of the applicant, therefore, the same has not been mentioned.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I find that the applicant has not come with clean hand as he has suppressed and concealed the material facts about his criminal history, which is also one of the relevant aspect for considering the bail prayer of the applicant.
In view of judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Neeru Yadav vs. State of U.P., (2015) 3 SCC 527, criminal antecedents of the accused cannot be ignored while deciding bail application. Discretionary powers of Courts to grant bail must be exercised in a judicious manner in case of a habitual offender.
The said judgment has been further followed by the Apex Court in the case of Sudha Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, 2021 (4) SCC 781.
The courts of law are meant for imparting justice between the parties. One, who comes to the court, must come with clean hands and no material facts should be concealed. I am constrained to hold that more often the process of the court is being abused by unscrupulous litigants/accused to achieve their nefarious design. I have no hesitation in saying that a person, who has approached the Court concealing material facts is not entitled for any relief and such petition/application can be summarily thrown out at any stage of the litigation.
Accordingly, the instant bail application is rejected.
However, it is open for the applicant to move second bail application with correct facts.
Order Date :- 28.2.2023
Saurabh
