Allahabad High Court

ALOK SHUKLAversusSTATE OF U.P. THROUGH SECRETARY HOME UP AT LKO

Decided: 9 April 2026
Bench: ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA

Holding

The court held that, in the absence of a made‑out offence under Sections 386 and 506 IPC and with the investigation concluded, the applicant is entitled to bail.

Summary

The High Court considered a second bail application filed by Alok Shukla under Sections 2 and 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 in Crime No. 339 of 2024. The applicant argued that the investigation was complete, the charge sheet had been filed, and no offence under IPC Sections 386 and 506 was made out against him, especially since a related case (Crime No. 340 of 2023) had already resulted in his bail. The State contended that the gang‑chart was valid and the applicant’s alleged threats fell within the definition of anti‑social activities. The court noted that the co‑accused had already been released on bail, the charge sheet was filed, custodial interrogation was no longer required, and the offence under Sections 386 and 506 IPC was not established. Consequently, the court allowed the bail application subject to standard conditions.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under the U.P. Gangster Act after the charge sheet has been filed.
Whether an offence under IPC Sections 386 and 506 is made out against the applicant.
Whether the investigation necessitates continued detention of the applicant.
Whether the stay of proceedings in the related case precludes further detention.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 386, 504, 506
U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 — s. 2, 3(1), 528

Subjects

bail
U.P. Gangster Act
anti‑social activities
IPC 386
IPC 506
charge sheet
custodial interrogation
stay of proceedings

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8259 of 2026

Alok Shukla
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State Of U.P. Through Secretary Home Up At Lko
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Utsav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., K.K. Rao, Sarvjeet Singh
Chauhan

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

Heard Shri Mithilesh Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Smt.
Anita Singh, learned Brief Holder for the State as also Shri K.K.Rao,
learned counsel for the First Informant.

This second bail application on behalf of the applicant Alok Shukla has
been filed seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 339 of
2024, under Section 2, 3 (1) of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities
(Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station-Civil Lines, District-Prayagraj,
during the pendency of the trial before the Court Below. The First Bail
Application of the applicant being Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.
39558 of 2024 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 09.12.2024 and
the applicant is languishing in jail since 07.10.2024.

Shri Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant while pressing the 2nd bail
plea of the applicant has reiterated the submissions advanced at the time
of pressing the first bail application. It is further argued that at the time of
pressing the first bail plea the investigation was going on against the
applicant and the charge sheet had not been filed. However, now the
charge sheet has been filed against the applicant and the Court concerned
has also taken cognizance of the same on 15.09.2025. It has further been
submitted that since the investigation in the present case in respect of the
applicant has concluded, there is no further requirement of the applicant's
detention for custodial interrogation. It is also argued that the present
proceedings under the Gangster Act have been initiated on the strength of
a solitary case being Case Crime No. 340 of 2023 under Section 386 and
BAIL No. 8259 of 2026
2

506 IPC, Police Station-Civil Lines, Prayagraj in which the applicant has
already been enlarged on bail. It has also been argued that the present
proceedings have been lodged only to keep the applicant behind bars and
to harass him. Co-accused Apoorva Sonkar has been enlarged on bail by
the Apex Court vide order dated 15.12.2025 (Annexure 12) to the bail
application. Co-accused Anupam Shukla @ Anupama Tripathi has also
been enlarged on bail vide order dated 16.02.2026 passed in Criminal
Misc. Bail Application No. 29710 of 2025. It has been argued that no
offence under Section 386 and 504 IPC is made out against the applicant
as no property or money is alleged to have changed hands on the basis of
the threats alleged to have been extended by the applicant and co-accused.
It is reiterated that the applicant is not a member of any gang or is
involved in alleged crime. Arguments touching to the validity of the gang
chart against the applicant have also been advanced. It is also argued that
a Coordinate Bench of this Court while considering an application under
Section 528 BNSS being Application No. 47712 of 2025 (Anupam
Shukla and Another vs. State of U.P. and Another) in which the applicant
is also a party and the said proceedings emanate from the same Case
Crime No. 339 of 2024 involved in the instant case, has been pleased to
stay the further proceedings of the Case Crime No. 339 of 2024 under
Section 2/3 (1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities
(Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Civil Lines, District-Prayagraj until
further orders. The trial of the applicant cannot be proceeded with and in
such circumstances the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

Per contra, learned AGA as also Shri K.K. Rao, learned counsel for the
first informant have vehemently opposed the bail plea by submitting that
the gang chart against the applicant has been prepared in accordance with
law. The First Information Report contains allegations that the applicant
and other co-accused persons resorted to public threats and coercion
physical violence to achieve their ends and such acts fall with the ambit of
Anti-Social Activities as defined under Section 2 (b) of the Act and as
such constitutes commission of cognizable offence by the applicant.
However, the counsel could not controvert the submissions made by the
learned counsel for the applicant.

I, have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the
BAIL No. 8259 of 2026
3

record. I find that the present proceedings have been initiated on the
strength of a single case as Case Crime No. 340 of 2023, Police Station-
Civil Lines, Prayagraj in which the applicant has already been enlarged on
bail. So far as the present Case Crime Number is concerned the further
proceedings of the said case has been stayed by the Court until further
orders. Prima facie, the Court is of the view that offence under Section
386 and 506 IPC is not made out against the applicant. Co-accused
Anupam Shukla and Apporva Sonkar have already been enlarged on bail,
charge sheet has been filed, cognizance has been taken and the custodial
interrogation of the applicant is no longer required. A case for bail is
made out. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

Let the applicant-Alok Shukla, involved in aforesaid case crime be
released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties
each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject
to the following conditions:-

1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses
and co-operate in the trial.

4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the
trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by
the court concerned.

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below
will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)
April 10, 2026
Deepak/

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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…