Allahabad High Court
HARSH CHAUHANversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The bail application is allowed, and the accused is released on bail.
Summary
Harsh Chauhan, accused under several provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, filed a bail application while already in custody since August 30, 2024. He contended that the police had falsely implicated him and highlighted his extensive criminal history. 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 Gangsters Act to be "still born" and therefore incapable of sustaining proceedings. Applying that precedent, the Court concluded that the incarceration under the Act lacked legal basis and granted bail without addressing the merits of the underlying case. The bail was conditioned on a personal bond and two sureties as per Supreme Court dicta in Girish Gandhi v. State of U.P. and related bail policy guidelines.
Issues considered
- Whether the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act is constitutionally valid and can support continued detention of the accused.
- Whether the accused is entitled to bail despite a history of multiple criminal cases.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 — s. 2(b)(i), 2(b)(iv), 2(b)(viii), 2(b)(xi), 3(1)
Subjects
- bail
- Uttar Pradesh Gangsters Act
- statutory invalidity
- criminal procedure
- Supreme Court precedent
- false implication
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35183 of 2026
Harsh Chauhan
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Surendra Mohan Mishra, Vishveshwar
Mani Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit has been filed explaining criminal history, the
same is taken on record.
1A. Heard Vikash Yadav, learned advocate, holding the brief, appears for
the accused applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Harsh Chauhan to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 491 of 2024,
under Sections 2(b)(i), 2(b)(iv), 2(b)(viii), 2(b)(xi) and 3(1) of U.P.
Gangsters Act, P.S.- Cantt., 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 three base cases, in which applicant is on
bail. Apart from it, accused applicant has criminal history of
fourteen cases, wherein, he is no bail. The charge sheet has been
submitted. The accused applicant is languishing in jail since 30.8.2024.
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.
BAIL No. 35183 of 2026
2
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.)
October 1, 2026
Krishna*
Digitally signed by :-
KRISHNA KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…