Allowed

Shahraj v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Oct 2025BAIL/35044/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under the UP Gangsters Act for an applicant whose gangchart showed only one case in which she was already on bail, with trial unlikely to conclude early. Considering Section 19(4) of the Act and without commenting on merits, the court granted bail with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties, subject to conditions including attendance at trial and non-tampering with witnesses/evidence.

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

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35044 of 2025

Shahraj

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶8

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Avinash Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶9

Court No. - 68

¶10

HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶11

Heard Shri Avinash Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. and perused the record of the case.

¶12

The present bail application under 483 B.N.S.S. has been filed on behalf of applicant Shahraj with a prayer to release her on bail in Case Crime No. 194 of 2025, under Section 2/3 of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District-Saharanpur.

¶13

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 gangchart annexed as Annexure No. 1 only one criminal case has been mentioned in which the applicant is on bail. Criminal history of one other case has been explained in the affidavit filed in support of bail application.

¶14

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 24.09.2025, undertakes that she 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.

¶15

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant, but has not pointed out any other case against the applicant except the cases shown by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶16

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 .

¶17

BAIL No. 35044 of 2025

¶18

¶19

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

¶20

(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 her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

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

¶22

(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.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

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.

¶27

October 27, 2025

¶28

Deepak/

¶29

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

¶30

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

Shahraj v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahraj v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradeep vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Harinandan Alias Hinna vs State of U.P.

Sagar vs State of U.P.

Nasir @ Javed vs State of U.P.

Rohit Singh Urf Tota vs State of U.P.

Chunnu Alias Arshad vs State of U.P.