Allowed¶19

Deena @ Deenanath v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 May 2026BAIL/13338/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail allowed — U.P. Gangsters Act Ss. 2(b)(i), 3(1) — S. 483 BNSS 2023 — Case Crime No. 22 of 2026, P.S. Baniyather, District Sambhal — gang chart — criminal history 15 cases, on bail in 13, acquitted in 2 — custody since 15.03.2026 — personal bond Rs. 50,000 with two sureties — bail conditions incl. S. 351 BNSS appearance — no expression on merits — Allahabad High Court — Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J. — May 6, 2026 — Deena @ Deenanath v. State of U.P.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted: applicant Deena @ Deenanath to be released on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conduct and attendance conditions (paras 20-24); breach of conditions to be a ground for cancellation of bail. ¶19

Deena @ Deenanath Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether applicant Deena @ Deenanath should be released on bail in Case Crime No. 22 of 2026 under Sections 2(b)(i), 3(1) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, during pendency of trial.

¶11

Court's answer

Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and evidence reflected from the record, and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court found it a fit case for bail and allowed the bail application.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

The applicant is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions: no inducement, threat or promise to dissuade any person from disclosing facts or tampering with evidence; no pressurising or intimidating prosecution witnesses; personal presence before the trial court on dates fixed for opening of the case, framing of charge and recording of statement under Section 351 B.N.S.S.; an undertaking not to seek adjournments on evidence dates when witnesses are present; and presence before the trial court on each date fixed personally or through counsel; breach of any condition shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

Key takeaways

Anything said in the order is limited to the purpose of determining the bail application and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits; the trial court remains absolutely free to arrive at independent conclusions on the evidence led.obiter¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — S. 483 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Ss. 2(b)(i), 3(1) — Case Crime No. 22 of 2026, P.S. Baniyather, District Sambhal — applicant on bail in both gang-chart cases and in 13 of 15 other criminal cases (acquitted in two), in custody since 15.03.2026; it was argued that heavy pendency made early conclusion of trial unlikely — HELD, a fit case for bail without expressing any opinion on merits: release on personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions (no inducement/tampering with evidence, no intimidation of prosecution witnesses, presence at opening of case, framing of charge and statement under S. 351 B.N.S.S., undertaking against adjournments on evidence dates, presence on each date personally or through counsel); breach a ground for cancellation; observations confined to the bail application, trial court free to reach independent conclusions. (Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J.; May 6, 2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13338 of 2026

Deena @ Deenanath

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Mukesh Joshi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 69

¶8

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶9

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶10

Heard Shri Mukesh Joshi, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri B.P. Singh, learned AGA for the State- respondents and perused the record.

¶11

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. 22 of 2026, under Sections 2(b) (i), 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, registered at Police Station Baniyather, District Sambhal, during pendency of the trial.

¶12

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the applicant is on bail in both the cases that have been shown against him in the gang chart, apart from the above, the applicant is having criminal history of 15 other cases and out of 15 cases, in two cases he has been acquitted and remaining 13 cases, he is on bail. The applicant is languishing in jail since 15.03.2026, 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

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant.

¶14

Applicant is on bail in both the cases that have been shown against him in the gang chart, apart from the above, the applicant is having criminal history of 15 other cases and out of 15 cases, in two cases he has been acquitted and

¶15

BAIL No. 13338 of 2026

¶16

¶17

remaining 13 cases, he is on bail. The applicant is languishing in jail since 15.03.2026.

¶18

Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record 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.

¶19

Let the applicant- Deena @ Deenanath involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on bail 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 :-

¶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

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

¶26

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

May 6, 2026 RKM

¶28

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶29

Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Deena @ Deenanath v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deena @ Deenanath 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

Sumit Vs State of U.P.

Shyam Vs State of U.P.

Monish Vs State of U.P.

Gautam Gihar Vs State of U..P.

Rohit @ Keera Vs State of U.P.

Samshul vs State of U.P.