Allowed¶17

Sachin Sharma Alias Monu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Oct 2025BAIL/35641/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail granted — Sachin Sharma Alias Monu (@Monu) v. State of U.P.; Allahabad High Court, Ashutosh Srivastava, J.; CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 35641 of 2025; decided October 15, 2025; S.483 BNSS; U.P. Gangsters & Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Ss. 2(b)(i) and 3(1); S.19(4) considered; Case Crime No. 237/2025, P.S. Rajpura, Distt. Sambhal; gang-chart two cases, on bail in both; 13-case history explained; in jail since 26.08.2025; personal bond and two sureties; conditions (i)-(v); no opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to Sachin Sharma @ Monu in Case Crime No. 237 of 2025 (Sections 2(b)(i) and 3(1), U.P. Gangsters Act), on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions (i)-(v) set out in the order.

Sachin Sharma Alias Monu Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, Sachin Sharma @ Monu, should be released on bail under Section 483 BNSS in Case Crime No. 237 of 2025 under Sections 2(b)(i) and 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters Act, during pendency of trial.

¶10

Court's answer

Considering the totality of facts, nature and evidence reflected from the record, and taking into account the provision of Section 19(4) of the U.P. Gangsters Act, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court found it a fit case for bail and allowed the bail application.

¶17

Ratio / Principle

The applicant was ordered to be released on bail in Case Crime No. 237 of 2025 on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to five conditions (non-inducement/tampering, no pressure on prosecution witnesses, personal presence at opening of case, framing of charge and recording of statement, undertaking not to seek adjournments when witnesses are present, and presence on each date personally or through counsel); breach of the conditions to be ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

Key takeaways

Anything said in the order is limited to the purpose of determining the bail application and shall in no way be construed as an expression on the merits; the trial court is absolutely free to arrive at its own independent conclusions on the evidence, unaffected by anything said in the order.obiter¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Ashutosh Srivastava, J.) allowed a bail application under Section 483 BNSS filed by Sachin Sharma @ Monu in Case Crime No. 237 of 2025, Police Station Rajpura, District-Sambhal, under Sections 2(b)(i) and 3(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The gang-chart (Annexure No. 2) showed two criminal cases, in both of which the applicant was already on bail, and his criminal history of 13 cases stood explained in paragraph 10 of the supporting affidavit; the learned A.G.A. did not point out any other case against the applicant. Considering the totality of facts, the nature and evidence on record and the provision of Section 19(4) of the Act, and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court held it a fit case for bail, released the applicant on a personal bond with two reliable sureties of the like amount, imposed five conduct conditions (breach to be ground for cancellation), and clarified that its observations were confined solely to the bail application.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35641 of 2025

¶3

Sachin Sharma Alias Monu

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Sunil Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 68

¶7

HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶8

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶9

Heard Shri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Puneet Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. and perused the record of the case.

¶10

The present bail application under 483 B.N.S.S. has been filed on behalf of applicant Sachin Sharma @ Monu, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 237 of 2025, under Sections 2(b)(i) and 3(1) of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police Station Rajpura, District-Sambhal, during pendency of the trial.

¶11

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 13 cases has been explained in paragraph no. 10 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application.

¶12

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

¶13

BAIL No. 35641 of 2025

¶14

¶15

in jail since 26.08.2025, 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

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.

¶17

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 .

¶18

Let applicant, Sachin Sharma @ Monu 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-

¶19

(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.

¶20

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

¶21

(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.

¶22

(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.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of

¶26

BAIL No. 35641 of 2025

¶27

¶28

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

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

¶30

October 15, 2025

¶31

Deepak/

¶32

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

Sachin Sharma Alias Monu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin Sharma Alias Monu 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