ORDER 1. The respondent no. 2 viz., Arun Yadav, has been directed to be released on bail by the High Court vide the impugned order dated 11.12.2017, though he is facing a charge of murder. Being aggrieved, the petitioner-complainant approached this Court for cancellation of bail by filing the special leave petition. 2. Leave granted. 3. That by itself would not have persuaded us to pass the order we propose to pass, but it is obvious that respondent no.2 has a history which does not support the liberty that is being granted to him by the High Court. 4. Ms. Vibha Datta Makhija, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Respondent No.2, vehemently pointed out that respondent no.2 has been acquitted or that cases have been closed against him, but that does not impress us, in the present case. In some of those cases, respondent no. 2 was prosecuted under section 302 of Indian Penal Code and in others; he was prosecuted under Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevent) Act. Without commenting on them, we consider this to be part of the respondent no.2-accused personal record, which disentitled him to the relief of bail. 5. As far as the present case is concerned, there are sufficient statements made by prosecution witnesses to implicate respondent no.2. We do not propose to comment on the veracity of the statements nor are we determining the guilt of respondent no.2 by referring to those statements. 6. Having regard to the overall circumstances, we hereby allow this appeal and set aside the impugned order passed by the High Court granting bail to respondent no. 2. 7. The trial may be completed as expeditiously as possible.