Uruj Alam @ Ashu vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7172 of 2025

Uruj Alam @ Ashu	Versus	.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P.		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)		: Mohammad Zakir
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)		: G.A.

¶4

Court No. - 71

¶5

HON'BLE NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶6

This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant - Uruj Alam @ Ashu seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.01 of 2025 under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Cyber Crime, District Bulandshahr.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. It is further submitted that in the gang-chart pertaining to the present applicant, only two cases have been shown against him and he has been granted regular bail in both the cases. It is further submitted that only on the basis of aforesaid two cases, the impugned first information report under the Gangster Act has been lodged against the applicant. Except the aforesaid two cases, no other criminal antecedent has been brought to the notice of this Court. It is further submitted that the applicant is neither the member of the gang nor he operates any gang. It is further submitted that charge-sheet in this matter has been submitted. If the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest by the police any time.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the anticipatory bail.

¶10

In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the law on the subject finally by holding that the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration

¶11

NABAIL No. 7172 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.

¶14

It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial.

¶15

It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

¶16

Considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till the end of trial.

¶17

The application is allowed accordingly.

¶18

In the event of arrest of the applicant, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till the end of trial on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶19

(i) The applicant shall make himself available before the Court concerned on the date fixed in the matter and will cooperate in the trial.

¶20

(ii) 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/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office.

¶21

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

¶22

In case of default of any of the conditions, the same may be a ground for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant.

¶23

November 18, 2025 ss

¶24

(Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.)

¶25

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

Uruj Alam @ Ashu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uruj Alam @ Ashu 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

Sonu Alias Mahesh vs State of U.P. and Another

Dampi vs State of U.P.

Amit Kumar vs State of U.P. through District Magistrate and 2 Others

Vikky Alias Peeter vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Babli vs State of U.P. and Another

Pawan Tiwari vs State of U.P. and Another