AJEET YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

                HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

          CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34497 of 2026

Ajeet Yadav
                                                                 .....Applicant(s)
                                    Versus
State of U.P.
                                                            .....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                      :    Piyush Kumar Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)                 :    G.A.

Court No. - 64
                         HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned AGA
for the State-opposite party and perused the record.

2. The instant bail application, under Section 483 B.N.S.S., has been filed
with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 473 of
2025, under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities
(Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station- Sipari Bazar, District- Jhansi, during
the pendency of trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the gang chart,
only one case is shown against the applicant and in the said case the
applicant has been enlarged on bail. It is next contended that apart from the
case mentioned in the gang chart, the applicant is involved in seven other
cases. The same has been explained in paragraph no.11(1) of the affidavit
filed in support of the bail application. Out of seven case, in one case, the
applicant has been granted bail, in three cases the applicant has been
acquitted, whereas in other cases the proceedings have come to an end by
efflux of time.

4. He further submits that in the F.I.R., in issue, the allegations with regard
to disturbing the public order, as also regarding gaining undue temporal,
pecuniary, material or other advantage of like nature against the applicant
are vague. In absence of allegation concerning an act or omission on the part
of an accused, covered by the definition of terms "gang" and "gangster" as
provided under Section 2 of the Gangsters Act, no F.I.R. is maintainable. In
the instant case, the F.I.R. is based upon the pending criminal cases and not
upon any new allegations or discovery of facts having serious reflection on
the society, for which purpose the Gangsters Act was enacted.

5. It is also submitted that considering the facts of the case, as stated above,
                                                                                                BAIL No. 34497 of 2026
                                                                      2

                                    there are reasonable grounds for believing that the applicant is not guilty of
                                    the offence under the Gangsters Act and that he would not commit the
                                    offence while on bail nor would try to tamper the evidence or influence the
                                    witnesses in any manner whatsoever it may be. The applicant is in jail since
                                    12.09.2025. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

                                    6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not
                                    satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

                                    7. Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material
                                    available on record as well as taking note of Section 19(4)(b) of the
                                    Gangsters Act, in light of the submission of counsel for the applicant to the
                                    effect that while on bail in this case, the applicant would not commit any
                                    crime/offence nor would try to tamper the evidence or influence the
                                    witnesses in any manner, whatsoever it may be, and without expressing any
                                    opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is
                                    entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

                                    8. Let the applicant- Ajeet Yadav, involved in the aforesaid case 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 conditions that
                                    he:

                                    (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

                                    (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,

                                    (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

                                    9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be
                                    at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

                                    September 28, 2026
                                    Abhishek
                                                                                                   (Vivek Varma, J.)




Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad