Allahabad High Court
Amit @ Ammy vs State Of U.P. on 6 November, 2024
Author: Sanjay Kumar Singh
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:173867
Court No. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40383 of 2024
Applicant :- Amit @ Ammy
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Omar Zamin
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
On the matter being taken up, Mr. Alok Kumar Dubey and Mr. Saumitra Dwivedi, learned counsel, have filed their vakalatnama on behalf of the informant, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant and perused the record.
The instant bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the applicant-Amit alias Ammy with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 690 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 120B, 34 I.P.C., Police Station-Hapur Nagar, District-Hapur, during the pendency of trial.
At the outset, learned Additional Government Advocate as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant pointed out that in paragraph No. 76 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application, it is mentioned that no criminal case is registered or pending against the applicant in any Court except the present case, whereas apart from this case, applicant has criminal history of following two cases:-
1. Case Crime No. 222 of 2023, under Section 2/3 Gangster Act, Police Station Hapur Nagar, District Hapur.
2. Case Crime No. 708 of 2022, under Section 3/25 of Arms Act, Police Station Hapur Nagar, District Hapur.
On putting query by the Court, learned counsel for the applicant could not dispute the aforesaid submission of learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and learned counsel for the informant and submits that deponent of this case is cousin 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 hands as he has suppressed and concealed the material facts about his criminal history, which is also one of the relevant aspects 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 :- 6.11.2024
Kashifa
