Allowed¶13

Chandan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Dec 2025BAIL/40495/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad HC bail allowed; S.483 BNSS 2023 bail application; U.P. Gangsters Act S.3(1); Case Crime No. 196 of 2025; P.S. Ahraura, District Mirzapur; solitary case in gang-chart, applicant already on bail therein; no other case pointed out by AGA; custody since 03.09.2025; S.19(4) Gangsters Act considered; personal bond plus two sureties; conditions incl. presence under S.351 BNSS; breach ground for cancellation; no opinion on merits; Ashutosh Srivastava, J.; December 16, 2025.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant Chandan on bail in Case Crime No. 196 of 2025 on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the five conditions imposed (paras 15-19), breach being a ground for cancellation. ¶13

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Chandan, booked in Case Crime No. 196 of 2025 under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (P.S. Ahraura, District Mirzapur), should be released on bail under Section 483 BNSS 2023 during pendency of trial.

¶6

Court's answer

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

¶13

Ratio / Principle

Applicant Chandan 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.

¶14

Key takeaways

Bail granted subject to five conditions: no inducement, threat or promise to dissuade disclosure or tamper with evidence; no pressurising/intimidating prosecution witnesses; personal presence before the trial court at opening of the case, framing of charge and recording of statement under Section 351 BNSS; undertaking not to seek adjournments on evidence dates when witnesses are present; presence on each fixed date personally or through counsel. Breach of any condition shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.ratio¶22
Clarified that anything said in the order is limited to the purpose of determining the bail application and is not an expression on the merits; the trial court remains absolutely free to arrive at its own independent conclusions based on the evidence led.obiter¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail allowed — High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Ashutosh Srivastava, J.), Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 40495 of 2025, decided December 16, 2025. Chandan, in custody since 03.09.2025, sought bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in Case Crime No. 196 of 2025 under Section 3(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Ahraura, District Mirzapur, during pendency of trial. The gang-chart showed a solitary case in which the applicant was already on bail, and the learned AGA, while opposing, pointed out no other case against him. Considering Section 19(4) of the Act and the totality of facts, and without expressing any opinion on merits, the court released the applicant on a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount, subject to conditions including presence under Section 351 BNSS at framing of charge/recording of statement; breach of any condition to be a ground for cancellation. Observations expressly confined to the bail determination, leaving the trial court free to reach independent conclusions.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40495 of 2025

¶2

Chandan .....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shubham Tripathi, Vinit Kumar Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶3

Court No. - 68

¶4

HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶5

Heard Shri Shubham Tripathi as well as Shri Vinit Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Ajay Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant - Chandan, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 196 of 2025, under Section 3(1) Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police Station- Ahraura, District- Mirzapur during pendency of the trial.

¶7

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, solitary case has been shown and in that case, the applicant is on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶8

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. It is next submitted that there is also no possibility of the applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or

¶9

BAIL No. 40495 of 2025

¶10

¶11

tampering with the witnesses. The applicant, who is languishing in jail since 03.09.2025 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.

¶12

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.

¶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, Chandan 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 under Section 351 of B.N.S.S.

¶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

BAIL No. 40495 of 2025

¶21

¶22

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

¶23

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.

¶24

December 16, 2025 Anjali

¶25

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

¶26

Digitally signed by :- ANJALI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Chandan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandan 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

Similar cases

Nawab Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ravi Nagar Alias Ravindra Singh Alias Ravi Kana vs State of U.P.

Shakir vs State of U.P.

Gudiya vs State of U.P.

Naushad vs State of Uttar Pradesh through Home Secretary, Lucknow

Abjal Alias Wajeer vs State of U.P.