Allahabad High Court
RAVISHANKARversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court held that the case met the criteria of Section 19(4) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act and therefore bail was appropriate despite the unexplained prior IPC offence.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for Ravishankar who was arrested in a case under Sections 2/3(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act. The applicant claimed false implication, asserted that he was already on bail in other matters, and promised not to misuse liberty. The State opposed, highlighting that the applicant had not explained a prior offence under IPC sections 379 and 411. After reviewing the facts, the nature of the offence and invoking Section 19(4) of the Gangsters Act, the court found the circumstances suitable for bail. Consequently, the bail was granted subject to a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and several conditions aimed at preventing witness intimidation and evidence tampering.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita in a case under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act.
- Whether the applicant’s failure to explain a prior IPC 379/411 offence is a ground to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Indian Penal Code — s. 379, 411
- Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act — s. 19(4), 2/3(1)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Uttar Pradesh Gangsters Act
- false implication
- witness intimidation
- conditions of bail
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16501 of 2026
Ravishankar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Tribhuwan Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Tribhuwan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manonj 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. 121 of 2026 under Section 2/3(1) of U.P. Gangsters and
Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, registered at P.S. Bidhuna, District Auraiya
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 29.3.2026. It is
further submitted that applicant is on bail in both the cases shown against him in the
gang chart and apart from the above, he is also on bail in one other cases lodged
against him. 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
and submits that applicant has not explained criminal history of one case relating to
offence under section 379/411 IPC.
5. Applicant is on bail in both the cases shown against him in the gang chart and apart
from the above, he is also on bail in one other cases lodged against him. However,
applicant has not explained criminal history of one case relating to offence under
section 379/411 IPC as pointed out by the learned AGA.
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.
BAIL No. 16501 of 2026
2
7. Let the applicant Ravishankar 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 :-
(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 14, 2026
Madhurima
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…