Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:121137 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21854 of 2025 Applicant :- Jagat Narayan Vishwakarma And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Hari Narayan Shukla,Sunil Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Prabhat Kumar Singh,Vineet Kumar Yadav Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 113 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 109(1), 351(2), 61(2) BNS, Police Station-Soraon, District-Prayagraj during the pendency of trial. At the outset, learned A.G.A. representing the State pointed out that in paragraph 17 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application, it is mentioned that "in fact the applicants are peace loving and law abiding citizen of this country and they have no criminal history". Whereas, apart from the present case, the applicant no. 1 Jagat Narayan Vishwakarma has criminal history of following two cases : (i) Case Crime No. 35 of 2008, under Sections 323, 325, 504 IPC, Police Station-Mauaima, District-Prayagraj, (ii) Case Crime No. 89 of 2024, under Sections 147, 149, 323, 504 IPC, Police Station-Mauaima, District-Prayagraj. Likewise, apart from the present case, the applicant no. 2 Lal Ji Vishwakarma has criminal history of following three cases : (i) Case Crime No. 35 of 2008, under Sections 323, 325, 504 IPC, Police Station-Mauaima, District-Prayagraj, (ii) Case Crime No. 259 of 2015, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 153A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station-Mauaima, District-Prayagraj, (iii) Case Crime No. 89 of 2024, under Sections 147, 149, 323, 504 IPC, Police Station-Mauaima, District-Prayagraj. On putting query, learned counsel for the applicants could not dispute the aforesaid submission of learned A.G.A. and submits that deponent of this case is relative of the applicants and he was not aware about criminal history of the applicants, therefore, the same has not been mentioned. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I find that the applicants have not come with clean hand as they have suppressed and concealed the material facts about their criminal history, which is also one of the relevant aspect for considering the bail prayer of the applicants. In view of judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Neeru Yadav vs. State of U.P., (2014) 16 SCC 508, 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 applicants to move second bail application with correct facts. Order Date :- 23.7.2025 Shubham Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM KUMAR AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad