Allowed¶14

Gaurav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 May 2025BAIL/14627/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Court No. 68), Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:91559; Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 14627 of 2025; Ashutosh Srivastava, J.; Order dated 28.5.2025. Keywords: bail under Section 483 BNSS; U.P. Gangsters Act 1986 Sections 2/3 and 19(4); gang-chart; Case Crime No. 24 of 2025; P.S. Mant, Mathura; applicant Gaurav; custody since 17.02.2025; personal bond with two sureties; bail conditions; cancellation of bail on breach; no expression on merits.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant Gaurav on bail in Case Crime No. 24 of 2025 on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount, subject to the conditions set out in paras 15-19, with breach constituting ground for cancellation of bail. ¶14

Gaurav vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether applicant-Gaurav, charged in Case Crime No. 24 of 2025 under Sections 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (P.S. Mant, Mathura), should be released on bail under Section 483 BNSS during pendency of the trial, taking into account the gang-chart criminal history and Section 19(4) of the Act.

¶8

Court's answer

After considering the totality of facts, nature and evidence reflected from record, and taking into consideration Section 19(4) of the Act, and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the court found the present case to be fit for grant of bail and allowed the bail application.

¶13

Ratio / Principle

Applicant Gaurav was directed to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to five enumerated conditions (including non-inducement/tampering, presence at trial dates, and undertaking not to seek adjournments when witnesses are present), breach of which would be ground for cancellation of bail.

¶14

Key takeaways

Everything stated in the order is expressly limited to the determination of the bail application and is not an expression on the merits; the trial court remains absolutely free to arrive at independent conclusions based on the evidence led.obiter¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail application under S. 483 B.N.S.S. filed on behalf of Gaurav, detained since 17.02.2025, in Case Crime No. 24 of 2025 under Ss. 2/3, U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Mant, District Mathura, pending trial. Gang-chart showed two cases in both of which applicant was already on bail; A.G.A. pointed out no further case. Considering the totality of facts, nature and evidence on record and the provision of S. 19(4) of the Act, and expressly without expressing any opinion on the merits, the court found the case fit for bail and allowed the application, directing release on a personal bond with two reliable sureties of the like amount, subject to conditions against inducement/tampering, witness intimidation, and adjournment-seeking, and requiring attendance at trial stages. The order clarifies that nothing in it bears on the merits and the trial court is free to reach independent conclusions.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:91559

¶2

Court No. - 68

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14627 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Gaurav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Kashyap,Ravindra Kumar Rastogi,Vishakha Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Ms. Vishakha Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Vijendra Kumar, learned A.G.A. and perused the record of the case.

¶8

The present bail application under 483 B.N.S.S. has been filed on behalf of applicant-Gaurav, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 24 of 2025, under Section 2/3 of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police Station-Mant, District-Mathura, during pendency of the trial.

¶9

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. In gang-chart annexed as Annexure No. 2 two criminal cases has been mentioned in both of which the applicant is on bail. Criminal history of three cases has been properly explained.

¶10

It is further submitted that the applicant is not a member or leader or organizer of a gang and he has not abetted or assisted in the activities of a gang as enumerated in clause (b) of Section 2 of the Act. Applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid case. It is next submitted that there is also no possibility of the applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. The applicant, who is languishing in jail since 17.02.2025, undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶11

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the

¶12

applicant, but has not pointed out any other case against the applicant except the cases shown by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record and also taking into consideration the provision of Section 19(4) of the Act and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail application is allowed .

¶14

Let applicant, Gaurav, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions-

¶15

(i) 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 or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court.

¶19

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶21

It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶22

Order Date :- 28.5.2025 Deepak/

¶23

Digitally signed by :- DEEPAK KUMAR KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Gaurav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gaurav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Jitendra Kumar Alias Chhotu vs State of U.P.

Nazir vs State of U.P.

Nishant Kiran Karnik vs State of U.P.

Shuaib vs State of U.P.

Nazir vs State of U.P.

Bhimsen vs State of U.P.