Allahabad High Court

ABHAY TIWARIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 17 May 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 Abhay Tiwari under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 in a case registered as Crime No. 40 of 2021. The applicant argued that the FIR was vague, did not allege any act falling within the definition of "gang" or "gangster" under Section 2 of the Act, and that he had already been granted bail in four other related 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 assurance that he would not tamper with evidence or influence witnesses, the Court, without expressing an opinion on the merits, granted bail. The order directed the applicant to furnish a personal bond and two sureties, and imposed conditions prohibiting evidence tampering, witness pressure, and mandating appearance before the trial court.

Issues considered

Whether the FIR under the Gangsters Act is maintainable given the alleged vagueness and lack of a defined gang or gangster act.
Whether bail should be granted under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters Act in view of the applicant’s prior bail history and assurances.
Whether the applicant poses a risk of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses if released on bail.

Legislation cited

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

Subjects

bail
U.P. Gangsters Act
Section 3(1)
Section 19(4)(b)
FIR
gang definition
evidence tampering
witness intimidation
criminal procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12676 of 2026

Abhay Tiwari
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

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

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shashank Shekhar
Pandeyh, 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. 40 of 2021, under Section 3(1) of
the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (for
short, the "Gangsters Act"), Police Station Kotwali, District Basti during
the pendency of the trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the gang
chart, one case is shown against the applicant and in the said case the
applicant has been enlarged on bail. It is next contended that apart from
the case mentioned in the gang chart, the applicant is involved in four
cases. In the said cases also he has been granted 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.
BAIL No. 12676 of 2026
2

5. It is also submitted that considering the facts of the case, as stated
above, 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 11.02.2021.

6. Learned A.G.A. has 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- Abhay Tiwari, involved in the aforesaid case, be
released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two 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; and,

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

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.

(Vivek Varma,J.)
May 18, 2026
SKT/-

Digitally signed by :-
SHIVA KANT TIWARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…