Allowed

Sumit Kanaujia v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Allahabad HC17 Oct 2025BAIL/9952/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under the U.P. Gangster Act. Citing parity with co-accused Neeraj Yadav already enlarged on bail, the applicant's bail in the sole gang-chart case, and jail custody since 24.02.2025, the court granted bail with standard conditions including undertakings not to misuse liberty.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions, in Case Crime No. 221/2025, PS Kakori, Lucknow.

Sumit Kanaujia Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9952 of 2025

Sumit Kanaujia

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amit Srivastava, Abhishek Chaubey, Anoop Kumar Srivastava, Km. Saumya Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 15

¶8

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶9

Heard Km. Saumya Tiwari learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶10

Learned counsel for accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case as well as in the sole case mentioned in the gang chart. In that case, he has been released on bail. The bail order is on record as Annexure No. 3 to the bail application. Apart from the sole case mentioned in the gang chart, there is no other case pending against the accused applicant.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the co-accused Neeraj Yadav has been enlarged on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.09.2025 passed in criminal misc. bail application No. 8978 of 2025. Learned counsel for the applicant seeks parity with the order of the co-accused.

¶12

It has been further submitted that applicant is in jail since 24.02.2025 and if facility of bail is granted, there is no apprehension that he will flee from the judicial process and he will abide by the orders passed by the Court below and will co-operate in speedy trial of the case.

¶13

BAIL No. 9952 of 2025

¶14

¶15

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but has not disputed the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the accusedapplicant.

¶16

On due consideration to the bail order of co-accused Neeraj Yadav, the fact that in the sole case mentioned in the gang chart, he has been enlarged on bail; apart from that sole case, there is no other case pending against the applicant and the applicant is languishing in jail since 24.02.2025, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶17

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶18

Let the applicant, Sumit Kanaujia, involved in Case Crime No- 221/2025, Under Section: 2(b)(i), 2(b)(xi) and 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station - Kakori, District - Lucknow.

¶19

be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶20

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶21

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶22

(iii) 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

(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 court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶24

(v) The applicant shall submit an undertaking on affidavit in terms of Section 19 (4) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 that he will not indulge in any case for or misuse the liberty of bail.

¶25

(vi) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code (Now Section 269 of BNS).

¶26

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in

¶27

BAIL No. 9952 of 2025

¶28

¶29

order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC (now Section 209 of BNS).

¶30

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial.

¶31

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶32

October 17, 2025

¶33

R.C.

¶34

Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sumit Kanaujia v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumit Kanaujia v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vikas Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another

Saurabh Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lko.

Md. Zaid (Fir Name Zaid @ Raja) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Amit Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko

Manish Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Imran Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another