Allahabad High Court
ISHRAK @ KALE KHANversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMEER JAIN
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail as the allegations and his criminal history do not justify its denial.
Summary
The applicant, Ishrak @ Kale Khan, sought bail in a case filed under Sections 3(1) and 2(b)(xvii) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. He argued that he is neither a gang member nor a leader and that the sole case linking him to a gang is isolated, while his other eleven criminal cases are pending on bail and often result from police implication. The State opposed bail but did not contest the factual submissions. The court examined the applicant’s criminal history, the solitary gang‑chart allegation, and the fact that he had been in custody for over two months. Concluding that the allegations do not preclude bail and that his prior cases are already on bail, the court granted bail with a personal bond, two sureties, and specific conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to the accused under the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 despite alleged gang involvement.
- Whether the applicant’s extensive criminal history warrants denial of bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed by the court are sufficient to safeguard the trial process.
Legislation cited
- U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 — s. 2(b)(xvii), 3(1)
Subjects
- bail
- U.P. Gangsters Act
- anti‑social activities
- criminal history
- gang affiliation
- personal bond
- sureties
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9156 of 2026
Ishrak @ Kale Khan
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shadab Alam
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Heard Sri Shadab Alam, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri
Manoj Kumar Singh, learned Brief holder for the State.
2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant
on bail in Case Crime No.0028 of 2026, under Sections 3(1), 2(b) (xvii)
of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986,
Police Station Phoolpur, District Azamgarh, during pendency of the trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, on the basis of solitary case
shown in the gang chart applicant has been made accused in the present
matter. He further submits, applicant is neither member nor leader of any
gang and he never indulged in any anti-social activity.
4. He further submits, however apart from the present case and solitary
case shown in the gang chart, applicant is having criminal history of
eleven other cases but his entire criminal history has been duly explained
and in all the cases including base case, he is on bail and his criminal
history suggests, in majority of cases he has been implicated by police.
5. He next submits, in the present matter applicant is in jail since
05.02.2026 i.e. for last more than two months.
6. Per contra, learned AGA however opposed the prayer for bail but could
not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the
applicant.
BAIL No. 9156 of 2026
2
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of
the case.
8. It appears on the basis of the solitary case shown in the gang chart
applicant has been made accused in the present matter and, however apart
from the present case and solitary case shown in the gang chart, applicant
is also having criminal history of eleven other cases but his entire criminal
history has been duly explained and in all the cases including base case,
he is on bail.
9. Further, considering the criminal history of the applicant, the argument
advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that in majority of the
cases, police implicated him, cannot be ruled out, at this stage. Further, in
the present matter applicant is in jail since 05.02.2026 i.e. for last more
than two months.
10. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case
discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
11. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the
case, the instant bail application is allowed.
12. Let the applicant - Ishrak @ Kale Khan 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 the court concerned with the following
conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed,
unless his personal presence is exempted.
(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer
or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social
activity.
13. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will
BAIL No. 9156 of 2026
3
be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of
the bail of the applicant.
14. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts
brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and
the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case
during trial.
(Sameer Jain,J.)
April 20, 2026
Mini
Digitally signed by :-
MINI KANAUJIYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…