Allahabad High Court
MRITYUNJAY RAJBHARversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
Bail was granted to the applicant subject to personal bond, sureties and standard conditions.
Summary
The applicant, Mrityunjay Rajbhar, filed a bail application under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, seeking release while his trial (Crime No.38 of 2026) is pending. He contended that the case was based on a single criminal charge shown in a gang chart, that he had already been granted bail in a related case, and that he was falsely implicated due to police rivalry and is not a gang member. The State Law Officer opposed the bail. The court, without delving into the merits, granted bail on the condition of a personal bond, two sureties, and compliance with standard conditions such as not tampering with evidence or intimidating witnesses. The court ordered verification of the applicant’s and sureties’ identity, status, and residence before accepting the bonds. Breach of any condition would lead to cancellation of bail.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 pending trial.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- U.P. Gangster Act
- criminal procedure
- presumption of innocence
- police rivalry
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21226 of 2026
Mrityunjay Rajbhar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jitendra Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sr. No.113 out of 131)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on
record.
2. Heard Sri Jitendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.P. Patel,
learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on
record.
3. By means of the present bail application, the applicant seeks bail in Case
Crime No.38 of 2026, under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social
Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station- Ranipur, District- Mau,
during the pendency of trial.
4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the prosecution
under the Gangsters Act have been launched against the applicant on the
basis of one criminal case shown in the gang chart in which he has already
been enlarged on bail by the court concerned. The detail of criminal case has
been mentioned in the affidavit accompanying the bail application. He has
been falsely implicated in the present case due to police rivalry. He is not the
member of any gang. The criminal history of five cases assigned to the
applicant stands explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since
08.04.2026. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the
liberty of bail.
5. On the other hand, learned State Law Officer opposed the prayer for bail.
BAIL No. 21226 of 2026
2
6. Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the bail application is
allowed. Let the applicant- Mrityunjay Rajbhar, be released on bail in the
aforementioned case crime on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to
the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to verification of sureties,
with the conditions that he shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate
witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as required.
7. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. Identity, status
and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court
concerned before the bonds are accepted.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
September 21, 2026
(Ravi Kant)
Digitally signed by :-
RAVI KANT
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…