Allahabad High Court

KALLU @ ASHOK YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 27 September 2026
Bench: VIVEK VARMA

Holding

The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 B.N.S.S. in a case registered under Sections 2 and 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant, Kallu alias Ashok Yadav, argued that the FIR was vague, did not disclose any act falling within the definition of ‘gang’ or ‘gangster’, and that he had already been granted bail in one case and acquitted or time‑barred in others. The State opposed bail but could not refute the applicant’s submissions. The Court examined Section 19(4)(b) of the Gangsters Act, which permits bail if the accused is unlikely to commit further offences or tamper with evidence. Without expressing an opinion on the merits, the Court held that the applicant was entitled to bail, subject to personal bond, sureties and conditions. Accordingly, the bail application was allowed.

Issues considered

Whether the FIR under the Gangsters Act is maintainable given the alleged vagueness of the allegations.
Whether the applicant is likely to tamper with evidence or influence witnesses if released on bail.
Whether bail can be granted under Section 19(4)(b) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 in the present circumstances.

Legislation cited

U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 — s. 19(4)(b), 2, 3

Subjects

bail
Gangsters Act
Uttar Pradesh
criminal procedure
FIR maintainability
evidence tampering
witness intimidation

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34511 of 2026

Kallu @ Ashok Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Piyush Kumar Shukla, Saurabh 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 nine other
cases. The same has been explained in paragraph no.12 of the affidavit filed
in support of the bail application. Out of nine cases, in two cases, applicant
has been granted bail, in three cases he has been acquitted, whereas in four
cases 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,
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
BAIL No. 34511 of 2026
2

17.09.2025.

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- Kallu @ Ashok Yadav, involved in the aforesaid case
be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy 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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…