HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31332 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Vivekanand Yadav, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Durg Vijay Singh, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.232 of 2025, under Sections 2(ख)(I)(XI)(XXV), 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Chauri Chaura, District Gorakhpur with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the instant case is of a matrimonial dispute. The prosecution under the Gangsters Act have been launched against the applicant on the basis of two criminal cases shown in the gang chart in which he has already been enlarged on bail by the court concerned. He has been falsely implicated in the present case due to police rivalry. The criminal history of thirteen cases assigned to the applicant stands explained. The applicant is in jail since 15.08.2025 and is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the criminal history of two cases assigned to the applicant has not been properly explained i.e. Case Crime No.85 of 2017, under Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vivekanand Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Chudamani Pathak Alias Sanjay Pathak .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Sikariganj, District Gorakhpur and Case Crime No.107 of 2012, under Sections 457 and 380 I.P.C., Police Station Bansgaon, District Gorakhpur. As such, the rigors of Section 19(4) of U.P. Gangsters Act stand applied to the applicant. There is every likelihood of applicant repeating the said offence, as such, he is not entitled for bail. 6. The Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 1400/2025 Munnesh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh has directed that the petitioners seeking regular bail or anticipatory bail must mandatorily disclose their criminal antecedents. Non-disclosure of criminal history itself could be considered as a ground for dismissal of bail. The Court directed: "We, accordingly, direct that henceforth each individual who approaches this Court with a Special Leave Petition (Criminal) challenging orders passed by the high courts/ sessions courts declining prayers under Sections 438/439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or under Sections 482/483, Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita shall mandatorily disclose in the 'SYNOPSIS' that either he is a man of clean antecedents or if he has knowledge of his involvement in any criminal case, he shall clearly indicate the same together with the stage that the proceedings, arising out of such case, have reached. Should the disclosure be found to be incorrect subsequently, that itself could be considered as a ground for dismissal of the special leave petition." 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the criminal history of two cases assigned to the applicant has not been properly explained by the counsel for the applicant, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 8. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously as early as possible in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment. 9. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the BAIL No. 31332 of 2025 2 said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. September 12, 2025 (Ravi Kant) BAIL No. 31332 of 2025 3 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad