Allahabad High Court

ANURAG GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 19 April 2026
Bench: VIVEK VARMA

Holding

The applicant is entitled to be released on bail under the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Anurag Gupta, who was in custody since 2 February 2026 in a case under the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant argued that the FIR was vague, did not satisfy the statutory definition of a "gang" or "gangster," and that he had previously been granted bail in eight other cases. The State opposed the bail but could not refute the applicant's submissions. Relying on Section 19(4)(b) of the Act and the applicant's assurances that he would not tamper with evidence or influence witnesses, the Court, without expressing a view on the merits, granted bail. The order required a personal bond, two heavy sureties, and conditions prohibiting evidence tampering, witness pressure, and mandating court appearances.

Issues considered

Whether the FIR under the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 is maintainable given the alleged vagueness of the allegations.
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Section 19(4)(b) of the Gangsters Act despite the pending trial.
Whether there are reasonable grounds to believe the applicant will not commit further offences or tamper with evidence if released on bail.

Legislation cited

U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 — s. 19(4)(b), 2(b)(i), 2(b)(xi), 3(1)

Subjects

bail
U.P. Gangsters Act
criminal procedure
sureties
evidence tampering
witness intimidation
court conditions

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12173 of 2026
Anurag Gupta

.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd Ismail Khan, Shiv Sagar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 64
HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

1. Heard counsel for the applicant as well as Sri N.K. Sharma, learned
A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No.0011 of 2026, under Section 2(b)(i),
2(b)(xi), 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention)
Act, 1986, Police Station AIIMS, District Gorakhpur, during the pendency
of the trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the gang chart,
eight cases are shown against the applicant and in the said cases the
applicant has been enlarged on bail.

4. He further submits that in the F.I.R., in issue, the allegations with regard
to disturbing the public order, as also regarding gaining undue temporal,
pecuniary, material or other advantage of like nature against the applicant
are vague. In absence of allegation concerning an act or omission on the part
of an accused, covered by the definition of terms "gang" and "gangster" as
provided under Section 2 of the Gangsters Act, no F.I.R. is maintainable. In
the instant case, the F.I.R. is based upon the pending criminal cases and not
upon any new allegations or discovery of facts having serious reflection on
the society, for which purpose the Gangsters Act was enacted.

5. It is also submitted that considering the facts of the case, as stated above,
BAIL No. 12173 of 2026
2

there are reasonable grounds for believing that the applicant is not guilty of
the offence under the Gangsters Act and that he would not commit the
offence while on bail nor would try to tamper the evidence or influence the
witnesses in any manner whatsoever it may be. The applicant is in jail since
2.2.2026.

6. Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail but could not
satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

7. Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material
available on record as well as taking note of Section 19(4)(b) of the
Gangsters Act, in light of the submission of counsel for the applicant to the
effect that while on bail in this case, the applicant would not commit any
crime/offence nor would try to tamper the evidence or influence the
witnesses in any manner, whatsoever it may be, and without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is
entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

8. Let the applicant- Anurag Gupta, involved in the aforesaid case, be
released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties
each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the
following conditions that:

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court;
and

(iv) shall appear on first Sunday of every month at the Police Station
concerned.

9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be
at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

April 20, 2026
S.S.

(Vivek Varma,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…