Amit Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.0029 of 2026, under Sections 2/3(1) U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station- Jaisinghpur, District- Sultanpur.

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the gang chart, one case has been shown against the applicant and in the said case he has been enlarged on bail. The bail order is annexed as Annexure No.3 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. Apart from the case mentioned in the gang chart, the applicant has criminal history of 13 other cases which have duly been explained in the bail application as well as in the supplementary affidavit as also bail orders have been annexed as Annexure No.4 to the affidavit filed in support of bail application as also Annexure No.S.A.-2 to the supplementary affidavit filed today. He further submits that co-accused, namely, Sachin Yadav, having identical role, has been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.03.2026 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.1553 of 2026. The applicant is in jail since 23.02.2026.

¶16

It is also submitted that the applicant is ready to furnish an undertaking in terms of requirement of Section 19(4)(b) of U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social

¶17

BAIL No. 1904 of 2026

¶18

2

¶19

Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶20

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail while stating that applicant is having criminal history of 13 cases, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶21

On due consideration to the facts that the applicant is in jail since 23.02.2026; the applicant has been enlarged on bail in the cases shown in the gang chart; apart from the cases shown in the gang chart, the applicant has criminal history of 13 cases, in which he has already been granted bail; identically situated co-accused Sachin Yadav has been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶22

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶23

Let the applicant- Amit Yadav 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:-

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

(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.

¶27

(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.

¶28

(v) The applicant shall also file an undertaking in terms of requirement of Section 19(4)(b) of U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 that he will not indulge in any case or misuse the liberty of bail.

¶29

BAIL No. 1904 of 2026

¶30

3

¶31

(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 in accordance with law.

¶32

(vii) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under 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 them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of BNS.

¶33

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.

¶34

March 28, 2026

¶35

Anand/-

¶36

(Rajeev Bharti,J.)

¶37

Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Amit Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

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

Similar cases

Haribhan Datta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Syed Mazahir Husain vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Vijay Kumar Tripathi @ Vijay Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Pawan Kumar @ Pawan Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Akash Gautam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Ramendra Saroj @ Pankaj vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.