Allahabad High Court
JAGDISH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant with specified conditions.
Summary
The High Court of Allahabad considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Jagdish Yadav under Sections 2(b)(i), 2(b)(xi) and 3(1) of the Gangster Act in Crime No. 143 of 2025. The applicant claimed innocence, asserted that he was already on bail in two related cases, and disclosed a prior criminal history of five cases, undertaking to cooperate with the investigation. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the allegations. Referring to the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, the Court examined the nature of the accusation, the applicant’s antecedents, and the risk of flight or evidence tampering. Finding that the criteria for anticipatory bail were satisfied, the Court granted bail on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions restricting tampering with evidence, intimidation of witnesses, travel abroad, and misuse of liberty. The prosecution was directed to seek cancellation if any condition is breached.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant under the Gangster Act
- Whether the applicant’s criminal antecedents and the nature of the offence warrant denial of bail
- Whether the applicant poses a risk of fleeing or tampering with evidence
Legislation cited
- Gangster Act — s. 2(b)(i), 2(b)(xi), 3(1)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Gangster Act
- bail conditions
- flight risk
- evidence tampering
- criminal history
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S
482 BNSS No. - 2023 of 2026
Jagdish Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Syed Ali Imam
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 72
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Mr. Syed Ali Imam, learned counsel for the applicant,
Mr. Manoj Gautam, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused
the record.
2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory
bail in Case Crime No. 143 of 2025, under Sections 2(b)(i),
2(b)(xi), 3(1) of Gangster Act, Police Station AIIMS, District
Gorakhpur, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant
may be released on bail.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant
that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in
this case. It is further submitted that the applicant is on bail in
both the cases shown against him in the gang chart. Apart from
the above he has criminal history of five cases which have been
explained. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to
co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when
required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been
stated that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he
shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the
investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.
NABAIL No. 2023 of 2026
2
4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the
application for anticipatory bail.
5. The applicant is on bail in both the cases shown against him
in the gang chart and apart from the above he is having
criminal history of five cases registered against him which
have been explained.
6. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa
Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has
been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding
anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of
accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee
from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available
material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of
the accused has also to be taken into consideration.
7. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law
regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel
for the parties, role of applicant and all attending facts and
circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on
merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.
8. The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
9. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Jagdish Yadav
involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on
anticipatory bail on 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 tamper with evidence and that he
would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless
exempted by the Court concerned;
(ii) 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/her/them from
NABAIL No. 2023 of 2026
3
disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) The applicant would co-operate during trial and would not
misuse the liberty of bail.
(iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior
permission of the Court concerned.
10. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be
at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of
anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
March 18, 2026
Virendra
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VIRENDRA KUMAR BHARTEEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…