Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

LALU @ AJAY @ PRADEEP @ HARVESHversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided

Holding

The court held that bail should be granted to the accused.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for the accused Lalu @ Ajay @ Pradeep @ Harvesh, who is charged under Sections 2/3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant claimed innocence, no gang involvement, and asserted that he posed no flight risk or danger of tampering with witnesses, while the State opposed bail. The court examined the provisions of Section 19(4) of the UGASA Act and relied on Supreme Court precedents that pendency of other cases does not justify denial of bail. Finding the applicant fit for bail, the court granted the application with conditions to prevent witness intimidation and ensure presence at trial stages. The order expressly limited its scope to the bail application and did not comment on the merits of the underlying criminal case.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a case under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.
  • Whether the pendency of multiple criminal cases against the accused is a ground to refuse bail.
  • Whether there is a risk of flight, witness tampering, or intimidation justifying denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal procedure
  • gangster act
  • Section 483 B.N.S.S.
  • Section 19(4) UGASA
  • flight risk
  • witness tampering
  • Supreme Court precedent

Judgment

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
          CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6218 of 2026

Lalu @ Ajay @ Pradeep @ Harvesh
                                                                .....Applicant(s)
                                     Versus

State of U.P.
                                                                   .....Opposite
                                                                         Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                        :    Priyavrat Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)                   :    G.A.

Court No. - 68
                 HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

Heard Shri Priyavrat Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri
Ramendra Pal Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the
record.

The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant, Lalu @ Ajay
@ Pradeep @ Harvesh, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime
No. 142 of 2025, under Section 2/3 of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti
Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police Station
Barnahal, District-Mainpuri, during pendency of the trial.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant
is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior
motive. Twenty three cases of criminal history have sufficiently been
explained.

It is further submitted that the applicant is not a member or leader or
organizer of a gang and he has not abetted or assisted in the activities of a
gang as enumerated in clause (b) of Section 2 of the Act. Applicant has no
criminal history except the aforesaid case. It is next submitted that there is
also no possibility of the applicant either fleeing away from the judicial
process or tampering with the witnesses. The applicant, who is languishing
in jail since 10.12.2025, undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if
granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of
cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
                                                            BAIL No. 6218 of 2026
                                  2


Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon the decisions
passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State
of U.P. and another, 2020 (11) SCC 648 and Abhimanue etc. vs. State of
Kerla, 2025 INSC 1136, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed
that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused may itself cannot
be a basis for refusal of bail.

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant,
but has not pointed out any other case against the applicant except the cases
shown by learned counsel for the applicant.

Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from
record and also taking into consideration the provision of Section 19(4) of
the Act and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to
be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail application is allowed.

Let applicant, Lalu @ Ajay @ Pradeep @ Harvesh, be released on bail in
the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two
reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned
with the following conditions-

(i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat,
or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer
or tamper with the evidence.

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on
the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii)
recording of statement under Section 351 of B.N.S.S.

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek
any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are
present in the trial court.

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date
fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
                                                                                              BAIL No. 6218 of 2026
                                                                    3


                                    In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
                                    cancellation of bail.

                                    It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of
                                    determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an
                                    expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free
                                    to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led
                                    unaffected by anything said in this order.



                                                                                       (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)
                                    March 19, 2026
                                    Deepak/




Digitally signed by :-
DEEPAK KUMAR KUSHWAHA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.