Allahabad High Court
AFSARversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting bail with conditions.
Summary
The applicant, Afsar (Puneet Kumar Singh), filed an anticipatory bail application under Sections 2 and 3 of the U.P. Gangster Act and the Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, claiming he was falsely implicated. He highlighted that he was already on bail in three gang‑related cases and one other case, and assured cooperation with the investigation. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the allegations. The Court, applying the principles from Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, considered the nature and gravity of the accusation, the applicant’s antecedents, and the risk of fleeing, and found a case for anticipatory bail. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and specific conditions, including non‑tampering with evidence and not leaving India without permission.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant under the U.P. Gangster Act and the Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 considering the nature of the allegations and his antecedents.
Legislation cited
- Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986
- U.P. Gangster Act — s. 2, 3
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- U.P. Gangster Act
- Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act
- false implication
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482
BNSS No. - 2200 of 2026
Afsar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohammad Zakir
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Puneet Kumar Singh, 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. 28 of 2026, under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangster Act and Anti-Social
Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Narsena, District
Bulandshahar, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, the applicant may
be released on bail.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicant is
on bail in three cases shown against him in the gang chart and he is also on
bail in one another case. It is further submitted that applicant is ready to co-
operate during trial and to appear as and when required by the investigating
agency or Court and in case he is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not
misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.
4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail.
5. The applicant is on bail in three cases against him in the gang chart. Apart
from the above, he is also on bail in one another case.
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, the Court must consider nature
NABAIL No. 2200 of 2026
2
and gravity of accusation, antecedents of the accused, possibility of accused
to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate the entire available material
against the accused carefully and the exact role of accused has also to be
taken into consideration.
7. Considering all attending facts and circumstances of the case, settled
principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of learned counsel
for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicants and 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 Afsar involved in the aforesaid case
crime, he shall be released on anticipatory 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 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 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 28, 2026
pks
(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
PAWAN KUMAR SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…