Allahabad High Court
MUKESH NISHADversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail in the pending case.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Mukesh Nishad, who was arrested in a case registered under Section 3(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act. The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, had been in custody since 15 April 2026, and was already on bail in six related cases with no prior criminal record. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, opposed the bail. After reviewing the record and invoking Section 19(4) of the Act, the court, without expressing an opinion on the merits, found the case suitable for bail. Consequently, the court ordered the release of the applicant on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties, subject to several conditions aimed at preventing witness tampering and ensuring his presence at trial dates.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita for an offence under the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act.
- Whether the applicant's lack of prior criminal history and existing bail in related cases justify granting bail.
- Application of Section 19(4) of the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act in the bail context.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 351, 483
- Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act — s. 19(4), 3(1)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- false implication
- surety
- witness tampering
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15111 of 2026
Mukesh Nishad
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Raj Kumar, Tarun Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Raj Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manoj Gautam, 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. 200 of 2026 under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangsters and
Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, registered at P.S. Kalyanpur, District Kanpur
Nagar during pendency of the trial.
3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been
falsely implicated in this case and he has been languishing in jail since 15.4.2026. It is
further submitted that applicant is on bail in all the six cases shown against him in the
gang chart and apart from the above, he has no criminal history to his credit. 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 is on bail in all the six cases shown against him in the gang chart and
apart from the above, he has no criminal history to his credit.
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 Mukesh Nishad involved in the aforesaid case crime be released
on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the
like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :-
BAIL No. 15111 of 2026
2
(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.
May 7, 2026
Madhurima
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…