Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:139361 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27975 of 2025 Applicant :- Guddu @ Sarvesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Kumar Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 225 of 2025, under Sections 8/20 NDPS Act, Police Station-Kotwali Mahoba, District-Mahoba, during the pendency of trial. At the outset, learned Additional Government Advocate pointed out that in paragraph 11 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application, the applicant has disclosed his criminal history of following 04 cases : (i) Case Crime No. 189 of 2019, under Section 392 IPC, Police Station Nighauli Kala, District Etah, (ii) Case Crime No. 46 of 2023, under Sections 399, 402 IPC, Police Station Nawabganj, District Farrukhabad, (iii) Case Crime No. 47 of 2023, under Section 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station Nawabganj, District Farrukhabad, (iv) Case Crime No. 49 of 2024, under Section 8/20 NDPS Act, Police Station Jasrathpur, District Etah. Whereas apart from aforesaid cases and the present case, the applicant has criminal history of additional 05 cases, which are as under : (i) Case Crime No. 46 of 2016, under Sections 392, 411 IPC, Police Station Marhara, District Etah, (ii) Case Crime No. 91 of 2016, under Section 307 IPC, Police Station Kasganj, District Kasganj, (iii) Case Crime No. 295 of 2016, under Sections 2/3 Gangsters Act, Police Station Marhara, District Etah, (iv) Case Crime No. 74 of 2021, under Sections 34, 392, 411 IPC, Police Station Faridpur, District Bareilly, (v) Case Crime No. 90 of 2025, under Section 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station Sidpura, District Kasganj. On putting query, learned counsel for the applicant could not dispute the aforesaid submission of learned A.G.A. and submits that since the son of the applicant is deponent in the present case and he was not aware about the complete criminal history of the applicant, therefore, the same could not be mentioned. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I find that the deponent has not come with clean hand as he did not disclose the complete criminal history of the applicant, which is also one of the relevant aspect for considering the bail prayer. 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 applicant to move second bail application with correct facts. Order Date :- 14.8.2025 Shubham Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM KUMAR AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad