A. Mateen, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate. Gone through the FIR, bail rejection order, other documents annexed hereto, including the gang chart, and counter & rejoinder affidavits exchanged between the parties. Submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that there are only two cases shown against the applicants, one relating to case crime no. 64 of 2009, under Sections 395 and 412 IPC and other relating to case crime no. 154 of 2009, under Sections 147/148/149/307/34 IPC, both relate to police station Bangar Mau. Further submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that since the applicants have been released on bail in both the said cases, the police authority just to see that the applicants remain behind the bars has imposed Section 2/3 U. P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 upon the applicants by lodging the present FIR on 18.03.2009. It has been argued that both the said cases arose out of one and the same incident and had been bifurcated into two cases. While looking to the overall aspects of the matter and without commenting any further on merit of the case, I find it a fit case for bail. Let applicants-Rahul, Suresh and Naresh, accused of Case Crime No. 406 of 2009, under Section 2/3 U. P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, police station Bangar Mau, district Unnao be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Special Judge concerned.;