Allahabad High Court
SAMEERversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
Bail was granted to the applicant without expressing an opinion on the merits of the underlying criminal charge.
Summary
The applicant, Sameer, filed a bail application in a criminal case (Crime No. 502 of 2026) under Sections 2 and 3 of the U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, alleging that he was falsely implicated due to police rivalry and is not a gang member. He had already been granted bail in a related case shown in a gang chart and had been in custody since July 9, 2026, despite having four prior criminal cases. The applicant argued that he would not misuse bail and that the prosecution’s case was weak, while the State opposed the application. The court, after hearing counsel for both sides, found no merit in the opposition’s submissions and chose not to examine the substantive merits of the criminal charge. Consequently, the court allowed the bail application, 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 warned that any breach of conditions would lead to cancellation of bail.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused under the U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, in light of the applicant’s alleged false implication and prior criminal history.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- U.P. Gangster Act
- criminal procedure
- anti‑social activities
- police rivalry
- sureties
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31769 of 2026
Sameer
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Chandrajeet
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sl. No. 52 out of 318)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Chandrajeet, 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. 502 of 2026, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social
Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station- Sardhana, District-
Meerut, 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 one criminal case shown in the gang chart in which he has already
been enlarged on bail by the court concerned. The details of criminal case
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 four cases assigned to the applicant, which
stands explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 9.7.2026. 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. 31769 of 2026
2
7. Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the bail application is
allowed. Let the applicant- Sameer, 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 9, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…