Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

ARUN @ PAVAN SHIVHAREversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided

Holding

The court granted bail to the applicant without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

Summary

The applicant, Arun @ Pavan Shivhare, filed a bail application in a case registered as Crime No. 351 of 2025 under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. He contended that the prosecution was based on a single criminal case shown in a gang chart for which he had already been granted bail, and that he was falsely implicated due to police rivalry and is not a gang member. The applicant had been in custody since 18 November 2025 and asserted that he would not misuse the liberty if released. The State opposed the bail, but the court found the applicant's submissions credible and did not express any opinion on the merits of the underlying charges. Consequently, the court allowed the bail application, directing the applicant to furnish a personal bond and two sureties, subject to verification and conditions not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses. The order also stipulated that any breach of conditions would be grounds for cancellation of bail.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail can be granted to the accused under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 despite the seriousness of the alleged offence and the claim of false implication.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act
  • criminal procedure
  • false implication
  • sureties

Judgment

             HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
            CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31890 of 2026

Arun @ Pavan Shivhare
                                                                .....Applicant(s)
                                     Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)                      :   Rajesh Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)                 :   G.A.

Court No. - 68
(Sl. No. 86 out of 318)

                          HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

1. List has been revised.

2. Heard Sri P.K.Tiwari, learned Advocate holding brief for Sri Rajesh
Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pankaj Srivastava,
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. 351 of 2025, under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social
Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station- Girwan, District- Banda,
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 one case assigned to the applicant, which
stands explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.11.2025. 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. 31890 of 2026
                                                                    2


                                    7. Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the bail application is
                                    allowed. Let the applicant- Arun @ Pavan Shivhare, 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


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.