HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Second Bail Application No.41 of 2025 Ganesh Adhikari ….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. Bhuwan Bhatt, Advocate for the applicant. Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, D.A.G. for the State. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) Applicant is in judicial custody in FIR No. 124 of 2023, under Sections 2 and 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (“the Act”), Police Station Ramnagar, District Nainital. He has sought his release on bail. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. This is second bail application of the applicant. His first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn on 08.07.2024. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the cases based on which, instant FIR has been lodged, the applicant has been granted bail. The co-accused have already been granted bail. 5. Learned State counsel submits that based on five case, instant FIR has been lodged against the applicant. She would submit that in one case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“the NDPS Act”), the applicant is a convict. His appeal is pending. But she submits that in another case under the provisions of the Act, the applicant is a convict. 2 6. There are various factors which are considered while considering bail. As a matter of rule, it cannot be stated that previous conviction may in all case debar bail. But then, totality of the circumstances has to be seen. The applicant is involved in a case under the provisions of the Act. He has been a convict in that case in the past and he had undergone sentence, as stated by learned counsel for the applicant. He is also a convict under the provisions of NDPS Act. 7. Having considered the entirety of the facts, this Court is of the view that there is no ground to enlarge the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 8. The bail application is rejected. (Ravindra Maithani, J) 06.08.2025 Jitendra