Allahabad High Court
SATYAM YADAV ALIAS RISHU YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
Bail was granted subject to a personal bond, two sureties and conditions of non‑tampering with evidence, non‑intimidation of witnesses and mandatory appearance before the trial court.
Summary
The applicant, Satyam Yadav alias Rishu Yadav, filed a bail application in a case registered under Sections 2(b)(i) and 3(1) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. He contended that he had been falsely implicated because of police rivalry, asserted that he is not a gang member, and pointed to a record of 22 other criminal cases for which he had already been granted bail. The State opposed the bail, but the Court, without expressing an opinion on the merits, allowed the application, directing the applicant to furnish a personal bond and two sureties, and imposing conditions that he not tamper with evidence, intimidate witnesses, and must appear before the trial court as required. The Court also ordered verification of the identity, status and residence of the applicant and sureties before accepting the bonds. The bail may be cancelled if any of the stipulated conditions are breached.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in a case under Sections 2(b)(i) and 3(1) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 despite the nature of the offence and the applicant’s extensive criminal history.
- Whether the applicant’s claim of false implication and lack of gang affiliation is sufficient to justify bail.
Legislation cited
- U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 — s. 2(b)(i), 3(1)
Subjects
- bail
- U.P. Gangster Act
- anti‑social activities
- false implication
- criminal history
- sureties
- court conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27322 of 2026
Satyam Yadav Alias Rishu Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Praveen Agrahari, Shubham Maurya
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :
Court No. - 68
(Sl. No. 143 out of 185)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for
the applicant is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Shubham Maurya, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.P.
Patel, learned State Law Officer and perused the material placed on record.
3. By means of the present bail application, the applicant seeks bail in Case
Crime No. 0052 of 2026, under Section 2(b)(i) and 3(1) of U.P. Gangster
and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station- Tarwa,
District- Azamgarh, 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 two criminal cases shown in the gang chart in which he has already
been enlarged on bail by the court concerned. The details of criminal cases
have 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.
5. There is a criminal history of twenty-two cases assigned to the applicant,
which stands explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 10.7.2026.
In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of
bail.
6. The bail application has been opposed but the submissions raised by the
BAIL No. 27322 of 2026
2
learned counsel for the applicant could not be disputed.
7. Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the bail application is
allowed. Let the applicant- Satyam Yadav Alias Rishu Yadav, who is
involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing
a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction
of the court concerned subject to verification of sureties, with the condition
that he shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall
appear before the trial court as required.
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
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 8, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…