Allahabad High Court
PRATIK PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant.
Summary
The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Pratik Pandey under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, fearing arrest in a criminal case (Crime No. 147 of 2026). The applicant claimed he was falsely implicated, noting that the only case shown against him in the gang chart was a single base case for which he was already on bail and that he had no prior convictions. The State’s Additional Government Advocate could not refute these submissions. Weighing the applicant’s clean record and the fact that he was already on bail in the only case, the Court found no reason to deny anticipatory bail. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail with standard conditions, including cooperation with police, no intimidation of witnesses, and no travel abroad without permission. The order clarified that the observations were limited to the bail application and not an opinion on the merits of the underlying criminal case.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, given his lack of prior convictions and the existence of a single base case where he is already on bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- U.P. Gangsters Act
- false implication
- bail conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 9970 of 2026
Pratik Pandey
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anjali Shukla, Apoorv Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 71
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit on behalf of the applicant, filed today in Court,
is taken on the record.
2. Heard Shri Apoorv Singh along with Ms. Anjali Shukla, Learned
counsel for the applicant, the Learned A.G.A. for the State and perused
the record.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicant in Case Crime No.147 of 2026, under Section 3(1) of U.P.
Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. -
Kachhwa, District- Mirzapur, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory
bail as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the above-mentioned case.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case. Only single base case has been
shown in the gang chart against the applicant and in the said case, the
applicant is on bail. The applicant has not been convicted in any offence.
The applicant has no other criminal history except the single base
case shown against him in the gang chart.
5. The 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 applicant.
6. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for
the parties.
NABAIL No. 9970 of 2026
2
7. Taking into consideration the fact that only single base case has been
shown against the applicant in which the applicant is on bail, having no
other criminal history and also the fact that applicant is not a previous
convict, I deem it fit to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail.
8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant
is allowed.
9. In the event of the arrest of the applicant Pratik Pandey, he shall be
released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on
furnishing a 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 applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police
officer as and when required;
ii. that 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police
officer;
iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission
of the Court;
iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution
witness;
10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned
shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
11. 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.
(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
September 30, 2026
Kushal
Digitally signed by :-
KUSHAL AGRAWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…