Allahabad High Court
INDRAPAL URF NIDHAversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that bail should be granted to the applicant under the applicable provisions.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Indrapal Urf Nidha, who was arrested in a case under the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act. The applicant claimed he was falsely implicated, had been acquitted in one of three related gang‑chart cases, and was already on bail in two other IPC 379/411 matters. The State opposed the bail, but the Court, after reviewing the record and invoking Section 19(4) of the GAAPA, found the circumstances suitable for bail without commenting on the merits. The Court ordered his release on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and imposed standard conditions to prevent witness tampering and ensure his presence at trial stages. The order clarified that it was limited to the bail application and did not affect the trial court’s independent assessment of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused under the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act in view of Section 19(4) of the Act.
- Whether the applicant’s prior acquittal and existing bail in other cases justify granting bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 483
- Indian Penal Code — s. 379, 411
- U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act — s. 19(4), 2, 3
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- GAAPA
- false implication
- presumption of innocence
- witness tampering
- bond conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11212 of 2026
Indrapal Urf Nidha
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manta Ram Gupta
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Manta Ram Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri B.P. Maurya,
learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.
2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on
bail in Case Crime No. 817 of 2022 under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters and
Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, registered at P.S. Khurja Nagar, District
Bulandshahar during pendency of the trial.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been
falsely implicated in this case and he has been languishing in jail since 23.12.2025. It
is further submitted that applicant has been acquitted in one of the three cases shown
against him in the gang chart and apart from the above, he has criminal history of
three cases relating to offence under section 379/411 IPC in which he is on bail. It is
further submitted that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if
granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in
the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant.
5. Applicant has been acquitted in one of the three cases shown against him in the
gang chart and rest of the two cases relate to offence under section 379/411 IPC in
which he is on bail.
6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record
and also taking into consideration the provision of Section 19(4) of the Act and
without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.
Hence, the present bail application is ALLOWED.
7. Let the applicant Indrapal Urf Nidha involved in the aforesaid case crime be
released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties
BAIL No. 11212 of 2026
2
each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following
conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or
promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from
disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates
fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement
under Section 351 of B.N.S.S.
(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any
adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial
court.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either
personally or through his counsel.
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of
determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression
on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its
independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in
this order.
April 20, 2026
Madhurima
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…