Allahabad High Court
HIMANSHU SINGH ALIAS CHOTU SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The Court held that, as the Supreme Court has declared the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 to be ‘still‑born’, the detention under it lacks legal basis and the bail application is allowed.
Summary
Himanshu Singh (alias Chotu Singh) applied for bail in a criminal case filed under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. He claimed false implication, noting that he was already on bail in two related cases and had a criminal history but was cooperating with the investigation. The State opposed the bail. The Court relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Shiv Pratap Singh Alias Chinu v. State of U.P. (2026 SCC Online SC 1677), which held the Act to be "still‑born" and its proceedings untenable, rendering his detention unlawful. Consequently, without examining the merits, the Court granted bail, ordering a personal bond and two sureties, and directed the applicant to cooperate with the judicial process.
Issues considered
- Whether the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 is constitutionally valid and can support continued detention of the accused
- Whether bail can be granted to the accused in light of the Supreme Court’s declaration that the Act is "still‑born"
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- Uttar Pradesh Gangsters Act
- constitutional validity
- still‑born legislation
- pre‑trial detention
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34789 of 2026
Himanshu Singh Alias Chotu Singh
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Aditya Kumar Singh, Prateek Pratap
Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Heard Sri Prateek Pratap Singh, learned counsel for accused applicant and
learned A.G.A. for State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Himanshu Singh @ Chotu Singh to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.
208 of 2026, under Section 2(b) 1, 3(1) of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social
Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S.- Kandhrapur, District- Azamgarh,
during the pendency of trial.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for applicant that the accused
applicant has been falsely implicated by the police under the provision of
Gangsters Act on the basis of two base cases, in which applicant is on bail.
Apart from it, accused applicant has criminal history of two cases, wherein
in all the cases he is on bail. The investigation is continuing and the
accused/applicant is cooperating in the investigation. The accused applicant
is languishing in jail since 28.08.2026. He seeks enlargement of accused on
bail.
4. Learned A.G.A. for State opposed the bail application.
5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Hon'ble The Supreme Court in the case of Shiv Pratap Singh Alias
Chinu Vs. State of U.P. & Ors reported in 2026 SCC Online SC 1677 has
BAIL No. 34789 of 2026
2
considered the proceedings initiated under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and
Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 and the Uttar Pradesh
Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021 and found
that the Act is still born and the proceedings initiated under it can not
survive. Hence, if the proceedings under the Act can not survive in view of
the dictum of Hon'ble The Supreme Court dealt herein above, the
incarceration of accused/applicant under the provision of the Act has no
legal basis.
7. Considered that the criminal history is explained and in the light of
aforesaid judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court, the accused/applicant is
entitled to be released on bail.
8.Hence, without touching merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.
9. The accused/applicant be released on bail in the aforesaid case on
furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of court concerned in view of observation made by the Supreme
Court in its dictums of Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh [(2024)
10 SCC 674] and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in re [(2024)10SCC
685].
10. The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and
speedy disposal.
(Avnish Saxena,J.)
September 30, 2026
Abhishek Sri.
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK RANJAN SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…