Allahabad High Court
KANHAIYA BINDversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The Supreme Court’s declaration that the U.P. Gangsters Act is "still born" renders proceedings under it unsustainable, obligating the release of the accused on bail.
Summary
Kanhaiya Bind applied for bail under Section 3(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, claiming he was falsely implicated and has no prior criminal record. He had been in custody since 29‑08‑2026 while the investigation continued. The State opposed the bail, but 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 that the Gangsters Act is "still born" and cannot sustain proceedings. Consequently, the Court found that the applicant’s continued incarceration had no legal basis. Without examining the merits of the underlying case, the Court ordered his release on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties. The judgment also referenced the Supreme Court’s observations in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2024) 10 SCC 674 and the policy for grant of bail (2024) 10 SCC 685.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 in view of the Supreme Court’s declaration that the Act is "still born".
- Whether the continued detention of the applicant has any legal foundation after the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- U.P. Gangsters Act
- Section 3(1)
- still born legislation
- pre‑trial detention
- Supreme Court precedent
- false implication
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34892 of 2026
Kanhaiya Bind
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjay Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Heard Sri Sanjay Dwivedi, learned counsel for accused applicant and
learned A.G.A. for State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Kanhaiya Bind to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 184 of 2026,
under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention)
Act, 1986, P.S.-Madihan, District- Mirzapur, 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 one base case, in which applicant is on bail.
Apart from it, accused applicant has no other criminal history. The
investigation is continuing and the applicant is co-operating in the
investigation. The accused applicant is languishing in jail since
29.08.2026. 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 considered the proceedings initiated under the Uttar Pradesh
Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 and the Uttar
BAIL No. 34892 of 2026
2
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 the base case, applicant is on bail 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…