Allahabad High Court
YAHIYA URF YAHYAversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
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 appearance before the trial court.
Summary
Yahiya Urf Yahya applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 465 of 2026) filed under Sections 2 and 3 of the U.P. Gangster and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. He contended that the prosecution was based on two earlier cases in a gang chart for which he had already been released on bail, and that he was falsely implicated due to police rivalry and is not a gang member. The applicant has six other criminal cases pending but has been in custody since 22 July 2026 and asserted he would not misuse liberty if released. The State opposed the bail, but the court, without addressing the merits, granted bail on the condition of a personal bond, two sureties, verification of identities, and compliance with conditions not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses. Any breach would lead to cancellation of bail.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused under Sections 2/3 of the U.P. Gangster and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, considering the applicant's criminal history and claim of false implication.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- U.P. Gangster Act
- false implication
- criminal history
- sureties
- trial pending
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29807 of 2026
Yahiya Urf Yahya
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Masoom Alam
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sl. No. 172 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 Masoom Alam, 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. 465 of 2026, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social
Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station- Kairana, District- Shamli,
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 six cases assigned to the applicant, which
stands explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 22.7.2026. 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. 29807 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- Yahiya Urf Yahya, 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…