Akhil vs State of U.P.

2 . The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 1368 of 2025 under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, registered at P.S. Kotwali Lalitpur, District Lalitpur during pendency of the trial.

¶12

3 . It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has been languishing in jail since 17.2.2024. It is further submitted that applicant is on bail in the solitary case shown against him in the gang chart and apart from the above, he is also on bail in three other cases lodged against him and in one case, his bail application is pending. It is further submitted that the applicant 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.

¶13

4 . Per contra , learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant.

¶14

5 . Applicant is on bail in the solitary case shown against him in the gang chart and apart from the above, he is also on bail in three other cases lodged against him and in one case, his bail application is pending.

¶15

6 . 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 .

¶16

7 . Let the applicant Akhil involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like

¶17

BAIL No. 11194 of 2026

¶18

2

¶19

amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶20

(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.

¶21

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

¶22

(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.

¶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 the trial court.

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

9 . 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.

¶27

April 20, 2026 Madhurima

¶28

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶29

Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Akhil v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akhil 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

Vikas Patel Vs State of U.P.

Uttamdas Vs State of U.P.

Himanshu Vs State of U.P.

Yaseen Pathan @ Yaseen Ghoda vs State of U.P.

Himanshu vs State of U.P.

Shubham vs State of U.P.