Allahabad High Court
ANAS URF POPAversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- VIVEK VARMA
Holding
The court held that, in the absence of specific allegations meeting the definition of "gang" or "gangster" and given the applicant's assurances, bail under Section 19(4)(b) of the U.P. Gangsters Act may be granted.
Summary
The applicant, Anas Urf Popa, sought bail in a case filed under Sections 2 and 3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. He argued that the FIR was vague, lacking specific allegations that fit the statutory definitions of "gang" or "gangster," and that similar bail had been granted in other cases listed on the gang chart. The State opposed bail but could not refute these points. 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 subject to personal bond, sureties and conditions. The bail order was issued on 6 May 2026, directing compliance with stipulated conditions and allowing cancellation upon breach.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR under the U.P. Gangsters Act is maintainable given alleged vagueness and lack of specific acts fitting the definition of "gang" or "gangster".
- Whether bail can be granted under Section 19(4)(b) of the U.P. Gangsters Act in the circumstances presented.
Legislation cited
- U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 — s. 19(4)(b), 2, 3
Subjects
- bail
- U.P. Gangsters Act
- Section 19(4)(b)
- FIR maintainability
- gangster definition
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14416 of 2026
Anas Urf Popa
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajesh Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 64
HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri
V.P.Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused
the record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with the prayer to
enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 01 of 2026,
under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social
Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Wave City,
District Ghaziabad 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 eleven cases. In the said cases also
he 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
BAIL No. 14416 of 2026
2
"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, 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
18.03.2026.
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- Anas @ Popa, 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
BAIL No. 14416 of 2026
3
witnesses;
(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by
the trial court; and,
(v) 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.
May 6, 2026
Lbm/-
(Vivek Varma,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
LAL BAHADUR MAURYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…