Allahabad High Court
MAHABEERversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The High Court held that, because the Supreme Court declared the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters Act to be "still born," the incarceration under its provisions lacks legal basis and bail must be granted.
Summary
Mahabeer, an accused under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, applied for bail while in jail since 20‑08‑2026. He claimed false implication and cited his criminal history, noting that he was cooperating with the investigation. The State opposed the bail. The High 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 that the Gangsters Act is "still born" and cannot sustain proceedings. Consequently, the court found no legal basis for his continued detention and granted bail without addressing the merits of the case, subject to a personal bond and sureties, referencing further Supreme Court bail guidelines.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act in view of the Supreme Court’s declaration that the Act is "still born".
- Whether the applicant’s prior criminal history precludes bail under the Act.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- Uttar Pradesh Gangsters Act
- still born doctrine
- criminal procedure
- Supreme Court precedent
- false implication
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34850 of 2026
Mahabeer
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sudhir Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Sri Sudhir Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for applicant hands up
supplementary affidavit explaining the criminal history, the same is taken on
record.
1A. Heard Sri Tripathi, learned counsel for accused applicant and learned
A.G.A. for State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Mahabeer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 406 of 2026, under
Section 2(b)(i), 2(b)(xi) and 3(1) of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social
Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S.-GIDA, District- Gorakhpur, 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, out of
which in one case, he is on bail and in another case, charge sheet is not
submitted as the case is punishable below seven years. The investigation is
continuing and the applicant is co-operating in the investigation. The
accused applicant is languishing in jail since 20.08.2026. He seeks
enlargement of accused on bail.
4. Learned A.G.A. for State opposed the bail application.
BAIL No. 34850 of 2026
2
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 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
Sharad/-
Digitally signed by :-
SHARAD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…