Allahabad High Court
SANJEEV PATHAK ALIAS SUDHIR SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for Sanjeev Pathak, who is accused under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act. The applicant claimed false implication, long pre‑trial detention since November 2021, and pointed out that he and co‑accused have been granted bail in other related cases. The State opposed the bail, but the court, after reviewing the record and invoking Section 19(4) of the Act, found the case suitable for bail without commenting on the merits. The court ordered release on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and imposed several conditions, including non‑interference with witnesses and attendance at trial dates. The order clarified that it is limited to the bail application and does not affect the trial court’s independent assessment of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in a case under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act
- Whether the applicant's alleged false implication and the existence of multiple pending cases affect the grant of bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 19(4), 351, 483
- U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act — s. 3(1)
Subjects
- bail
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities Act
- Section 19(4)
- false implication
- pre‑trial detention
- conditions of bail
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31667 of 2025
Sanjeev Pathak Alias Sudhir Sharma
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Chandra Prakash Pathak, Jawahar Lal Dubey,
Surya Prakash Pathak
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Jawahar Lal Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri B.P. Singh,
learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.
2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on
bail in Case Crime No. 530 of 2021 under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangsters and
Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, registered at P.S. Sigra, District Varanasi
during pendency of the trial.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been
falsely implicated in this case and he has been languishing in jail since 13.11.2021. It
is further submitted that applicant is on bail in all the four cases shown against him in
the gang chart and apart from the above, he is also on bail in seven other cases lodged
against him. It is further submitted that co-accused Jasbeer Kaur and Vishal Sharma
have already been granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated
12.10.2022 and 02.3.2023 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application Nos. 45011 of 2022
and 4289 of 2023 respectively. It is further submitted that the applicant undertakes
that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the
wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early
conclusion of trial.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant.
5. Applicant is on bail in all the four cases shown against him in the gang chart and
apart from the above, he is also on bail in seven other cases lodged against him. Co-a
ccused Jasbeer Kaur and Vishal Sharma have already been granted bail by Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court.
6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record
and also taking into consideration the provision of Section 19(4) of the Act and
BAIL No. 31667 of 2025
2
without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.
Hence, the present bail application is ALLOWED.
7. Let the applicant Sanjeev Pathak Alias Sudhir Sharma involved in the aforesaid
case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with
two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the
following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or
promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from
disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates
fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement
under Section 351 of B.N.S.S.
(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any
adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial
court.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either
personally or through his counsel.
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of
determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression
on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its
independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in
this order.
April 23, 2026
Madhurima
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…