Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

PUSHPENDRAversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided

Holding

The bail application was allowed, granting bail to the applicant subject to bond, sureties, and conditions.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Pushpendra, who was arrested in connection with Crime No. 158 of 2026 under Sections 2 and 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant contended that he had been falsely implicated due to police rivalry, was not a gang member, and had already secured bail in two related cases shown in a gang chart. He had been in custody since July 8, 2026, and argued that he would not misuse the liberty if released. The opposition could not effectively rebut these submissions. Without expressing an opinion on the merits, the court allowed the bail, directing the applicant to furnish a personal bond and two sureties, subject to verification and conditions against tampering with evidence or intimidating witnesses. The order also stipulated that breach of conditions would be grounds for cancellation of bail.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail can be granted during the pendency of trial under Sections 2/3 of the U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.
  • Whether the applicant's claim of false implication and lack of gang affiliation justify the grant of bail.
  • Whether the applicant's prior criminal history and current custody affect the bail decision.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • U.P. Gangster Act
  • false implication
  • police rivalry
  • sureties
  • criminal procedure
  • trial court

Judgment

             HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
            CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31580 of 2026

Pushpendra
                                                                .....Applicant(s)
                                     Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)                       :   Sunil Kumar Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)                  :   G.A.

Court No. - 68
(Sl. No. 44 out of 185)

                          HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

1. List has been revised.

2. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.P.
Singh, 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. 158 of 2026, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social
Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station- Makkhanpur, District-
Firozabad, 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 one case assigned to the applicant, which
stands explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 8.7.2026. 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
learned counsel for the applicant could not be disputed.
                                                                                              BAIL No. 31580 of 2026
                                                                      2


                                    7. Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the bail application is
                                    allowed.    Let    the     applicant- Pushpendra,   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


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.