HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1743 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Crime no. 413/2025, U/s - 3(1) U.P Gangster Act, Police Station – Fatehpur Chaurashi, District - Unnao. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. Notice to respondent no. 2 are dispensed with in view of the proposed order. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that two cases are reflected in the gang chart and in both of them the applicant has already been granted bail. Apart from these, the applicant has criminal antecedents in four additional cases, in which he has also been enlarged on bail. It is further contended that co-accused, Mantu Pandey, has been granted anticipatory bail, a copy whereof has been filed as Annexure SA-3 to the bail application, and the applicant seeks parity with the said order. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. submits that the applicant has a criminal history of six cases in total, whereas co-accused, Mantu Pandey, was granted anticipatory bail since he had only a solitary case shown in the gang chart and was otherwise not involved in any other criminal case. Perused the record. It is evident from the record that while the applicant is involved in two cases Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amit Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Chhotu @ Divakar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) mentioned in the gang chart in addition to four other criminal cases, co- accused Mantu Pandey was implicated solely on account of a single case shown in the gang chart. Therefore, no parity exists between the two, and the case of the applicant stands on a different footing. Considering the chequered criminal history of the applicant, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is dismissed. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant prays that the applicant be granted liberty to file a regular bail application which may be decided in accordance with the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, SLP (Cri.) No. 5191 of 2021. In view of the innocuous nature of the prayer, it is provided that in case the applicant files a regular bail application within ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 07.10.2021 in Satender Kumar Antil (supra). November 26, 2025 R.C. NABAIL No. 1743 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench