Allahabad High Court
BRIJESH KUMAR TRIPATHI @ UMESHversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The Supreme Court’s declaration that the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act is "still born" renders any detention under it illegal, entitling the accused to bail.
Summary
The accused, Brijesh Kumar Tripathi, filed a bail application under Sections 2 and 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, while the trial was pending. He claimed false implication and highlighted his prior criminal history, noting that he had been in custody since 27‑August‑2026. The State opposed the bail, but the Court considered the Supreme Court’s recent judgment 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 any proceedings. Relying on that precedent and the applicant’s criminal record being explained, the Court found no legal basis for continued detention. Consequently, the bail application was allowed without addressing the merits of the underlying case. The Court ordered release on personal bond and two sureties, directing the accused to cooperate with the judicial process.
Issues considered
- Whether detention under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act is valid after the Supreme Court declared the Act "still born".
- Whether the accused’s prior criminal history precludes the grant of bail.
- Whether the pending investigation affects the bail decision.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- U.P. Gangsters Act
- still born doctrine
- pre‑trial detention
- Supreme Court precedent
- criminal history
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35131 of 2026
Brijesh Kumar Tripathi @ Umesh
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Onkar Nath
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Heard Onkar Nath, learned counsel for accused applicant and learned
A.G.A. for State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Brijesh Kumar Tripathi @ Umesh to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime
No. 352 of 2026, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social
Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S.- Khaga, District- Fatehpur, 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 criminal history of four cases,
wherein, in one case, he has been acquitted, in one case, final report has
been submitted and in two cases, he is on bail. The investigation is
continuing. The accused applicant is languishing in jail since 27.8.2026.
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
BAIL No. 35131 of 2026
2
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.)
October 1, 2026
Krishna*
Digitally signed by :-
KRISHNA KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…