Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

KAMLESH CHAUHANversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided

Holding

Bail was granted to the applicant 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

Kamlesh Chauhan applied for bail in a case registered under Sections 2(b)(i) and 3(1) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, alleging that the prosecution was based on police rivalry and that he is not a gang member. He has five prior criminal cases and has been in custody since 30 June 2026. The applicant submitted affidavits showing he had already been granted bail in related gang‑chart cases and argued that he would not misuse liberty if released. The State opposed the bail but the court found no merit in the opposition. Without addressing the substantive merits, the court granted bail on the condition of a personal bond, two sureties, verification of identities, and compliance with non‑tampering, non‑intimidation, and appearance requirements.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail can be granted in a case under the U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 during the pendency of trial.
  • Whether the applicant's prior criminal history precludes the grant of bail.
  • Whether allegations of false implication and police rivalry affect the bail decision.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • U.P. Gangster Act
  • false implication
  • police rivalry
  • sureties
  • criminal history
  • conditions of bail

Judgment

             HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
            CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28994 of 2026

Kamlesh Chauhan
                                                                .....Applicant(s)
                                     Versus

State of U.P.
                                                                    .....Opposite
                                                                          Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)             :   Indra Deo Yadav, Yashpal Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)        :   G.A.

Court No. - 68
(Sl. No. 88 out of 115)

                          HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

1. List has been revised. Two supplementary affidavit filed by learned
counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

2. Heard Sri Indra Deo Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.M.
Yadav, learned A.G.A. 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. 102 of 2026, under Section 2(b)(i), 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and
Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station- Kotwali,
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 three 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 five cases assigned to the applicant, which
stands explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 30.6.2026. 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. 28994 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- Kamlesh Chauhan, 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 17, 2026
                                    Shalini




Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.