Allahabad High Court

SHIVALAYAversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 28 September 2026
Bench: VIVEK VARMA

Holding

The applicant is entitled to be released on bail under Section 19(4)(b) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.

Summary

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Shivalaya, who was in custody for a case under Sections 2 and 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant argued that the FIR was vague, did not disclose any act fitting the definition of "gang" or "gangster," and that he had already been granted bail in three other related cases. The State opposed bail but could not refute the applicant's submissions. Relying on Section 19(4)(b) of the Act and the applicant's assurance that he would not commit further offences or tamper with evidence, the court, without expressing an opinion on the merits, granted bail. The court ordered the applicant to furnish a personal bond and two sureties, and imposed conditions of appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and non‑pressurisation of witnesses.

Issues considered

Whether the FIR under the Gangsters Act is maintainable given the alleged vagueness of the allegations.
Whether bail should be granted under Section 19(4)(b) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.
Whether the applicant poses a risk of committing further offences, tampering with evidence, or influencing witnesses if released on bail.

Legislation cited

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

Subjects

bail
U.P. Gangsters Act
Section 19(4)(b)
criminal procedure
FIR validity
evidence tampering
witness intimidation

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34640 of 2026

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dhananjay Singh Yadav, Virat Pratap
Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

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

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

2. The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 197 of 2026, under Section 2/3 of the
U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police
Station- Linepar, District- Firozabad, during the pendency of trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the gang chart,
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 three cases. In the
said cases also he has been enlarged on bail.

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
BAIL No. 34640 of 2026
2

witnesses in any manner whatsoever it may be. The applicant is in jail since
6.9.2026.

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- Shivalaya, 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 29, 2026
Manish Kr

(Vivek Varma,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
MANISH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…