Allowed¶20

Vishal Pal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Oct 2025BAIL/35634/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Ashutosh Srivastava, J., 29.10.2025) allows bail under Ss. 2/3 U.P. Gangsters Act, 1986 in Case Crime No. 402 of 2025, P.S. Soron, Kasganj; custody since 11.08.2025; S. 19(4) considered; Prabhakar Tewari, 2020 (11) SCC 648 referred on pendency of cases; AGA did not oppose; conditional bail (personal bond + two sureties); no expression on merits.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to applicant Vishal Pal in Case Crime No. 402 of 2025 on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount, subject to conditions (no inducement/tampering, no pressurising prosecution witnesses, presence at specified trial stages, undertaking not to seek adjournments when witnesses are present, presence on each date personally or through counsel); breach to be a ground for cancellation. ¶20

Vishal Pal Vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Vishal Pal, arraigned in Case Crime No. 402 of 2025 under Sections 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, deserves to be released on bail during pendency of the trial.

¶13

Court's answer

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

¶20

Ratio / Principle

The applicant Vishal Pal was directed to be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to enumerated conditions; breach of any condition shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶21

Key takeaways

Anything said in the order is limited to the purpose of determination of the bail application and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits; the trial court is absolutely free to arrive at independent conclusions on the evidence led.obiter¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Ss. 2/3 — Case Crime No. 402 of 2025, P.S. Soron, District Kasganj — applicant in jail since 11.08.2025 — gang-chart criminal history explained; counsel submitted applicant already released on bail in all gang-chart cases and relies on Prabhakar Tewari v. State of U.P., 2020 (11) SCC 648 (pendency of several cases against an accused may itself not be a basis for refusal of bail) — learned AGA did not oppose and pointed out no other case beyond the gang-chart — court considered S. 19(4) of the Act and, without expressing any opinion on merits, found it a fit case for bail — bail allowed on personal bond and two reliable sureties with conditions; anything said limited to bail determination, trial court free to reach independent conclusions.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35634 of 2025

Vishal Pal

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶8

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anil Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶9

Court No. - 68

¶10

HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶11

Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State-Respondent and perused the record.

¶13

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 402 of 2025, under Section 2/3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police Station Soron, District Kasganj, during pendency of the trial.

¶14

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. Criminal history as mentioned in the gang-chart has been explained in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has already been released on bail in all the cases mentioned in the gang chart.

¶15

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 11.08.2025, 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.

¶16

Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon a decision passed in the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2020 (11) SCC 648 , wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused may itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail.

¶17

BAIL No. 35634 of 2025

¶18

¶19

Per contra learned A.G.A. could not oppose the prayer for bail of the applicant and also could not pointed out any other case against the applicant except the case shown in the gang-chart made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶20

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 .

¶21

Let the applicant, Vishal Pal, 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-

¶22

(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.

¶23

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

¶24

(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.

¶25

(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.

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

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.

¶29

October 29, 2025 pks

¶30

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

¶31

Digitally signed by :- PAWAN KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vishal Pal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishal Pal 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases