Allahabad High Court
ZEESHAN AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicants, holding that the circumstances warranted such relief under Section 482 CrPC.
Summary
The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed under Section 482 of the CrPC in a case registered under Sections 2 and 3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicants, Zeeshan and Gulistana, claimed they were falsely implicated and that only a single base case existed in which they were already on bail, and they had no prior convictions. The State opposed the bail but could not rebut the applicants' submissions. The Court noted the lack of prior convictions and the existence of a single base case, and consequently granted anticipatory bail with standard conditions such as cooperation with police, no intimidation of witnesses, and no travel abroad without permission. The order also stipulated that bail could be cancelled upon breach of any condition.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 482 CrPC in a case under the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 when the accused are already on bail in the base case.
- Whether the fact that the applicants are not previous convicts and face only a single base case justifies the grant of anticipatory bail.
- What conditions may be imposed on anticipatory bail in such circumstances.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- U.P. Gangsters Act
- false implication
- bail conditions
- no prior conviction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482
BNSS No. - 8563 of 2026
Zeeshan And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rakesh Kumar Maurya
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 71
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.
1. Supplementary Affidavit filed today is taken on the record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State
as well as perused the record.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicants in Case Crime no. 159 of 2025, under Section 2/3 of the U.P.
Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station
Barla, District-Aligarh, with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail as
the applicants apprehend their arrest in the abovementioned case.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been
falsely implicated in the present case. Only single base case has been shown
in the gang chart against the applicants and in the said case, the applicants
are on bail. The applicant No.1 has a criminal history of one other case and
applicant No.2 has a criminal history of two other cases. They are not
previous convicts. The Learned counsel for the applicant contends that
similarly situated co-accused Mishakin and Sualin have been granted
anticipatory bail by this Court in CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY
BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. 8522 of 2026.
5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail,
however, has been unable to dispute the submissions made by the Learned
counsel for the applicants.
6. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for the
NABAIL No. 8563 of 2026
2
parties.
7. Taking into consideration the fact that only single base case has been
shown against the applicants in which the applicants are on bail and also the
fact that applicants are not previous convicts, I deem it fit to enlarge the
applicants on anticipatory bail.
8. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it
appropriate to enlarge applicants on anticipatory bail.
9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is
allowed.
10. In the event of the arrest of the applicants-Zeeshan and Gulistana, they
shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on
furnishing of their personal bond and surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station/Court
concerned with the following conditions:-
i. the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police
officer as and when required;
ii. that the applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police
officer;
iii. that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission
of the Court;
iv. that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness;
11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned
shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
12. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for
deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and are not to be considered
to be an opinion on the merits of the case.
September 8, 2026
Sartaj
(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SARTAJ AHMAD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…