Allahabad High Court
SOHAN PRASAD RAVANIversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The bail application is allowed, and the applicant is released on bail subject to conditions.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Sohan Prasad Ravani, who was arrested in a case under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act. The applicant claimed false implication, cited his existing bail in a related case, and highlighted a criminal history of 13 cases, while also noting that a co‑accused had already been granted bail. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offence. The Court, after reviewing the record and invoking Section 19(4) of the B.N.S.S., found the matter suitable for bail without expressing any view on the merits. Consequently, the Court ordered the release of the applicant on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties, subject to several conditions including non‑interference with witnesses and attendance at trial dates.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita to an accused under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act despite a history of multiple cases.
- Whether the provisions of Section 19(4) of the B.N.S.S. permit bail in the present circumstances.
- Whether the bail granted to a co‑accused influences the decision on bail for the applicant.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 19(4), 351, 483
- U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act — s. 3(1)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- U.P. Gangsters Act
- false implication
- conditions of bail
- section 19(4) B.N.S.S.
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6403 of 2026
Sohan Prasad Ravani
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Saurabh Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on
record.
2. Heard Sri Saurabh Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashish Kumar
Tripathi, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.
3. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on
bail in Case Crime No. 01 of 2026 under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangsters and
Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, registered at P.S. Kachhwa, District Mirzapur
during pendency of the trial.
4. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been
falsely implicated in this case and he has been languishing in jail since 01.1.2026. It is
further submitted that applicant is on bail in the solitary case shown against him in the
gang chart and apart from the above, he has criminal history of 13 cases which has
been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed today. It is further submitted that
co-accused Ram Janam Yadav has already been granted bail by this Court vide order
dated 29.4.2026 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 13395 of 2026. It is further
submitted that the applicant 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.
5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant.
6. Applicant is on bail in the solitary case shown against him in the gang chart and
apart from the above, he has criminal history of 13 cases which has been explained in
the supplementary affidavit filed today. Co-accused Ram Janam Yadav has already
been granted bail by this Court.
7. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record
BAIL No. 6403 of 2026
2
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.
8. Let the applicant Sohan Prasad Ravani involved in the aforesaid case crime be
released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties
each in 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.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
10. 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.
May 5, 2026
Madhurima
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…