Allowed¶26

Shivraj Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC23 Mar 2026BAIL/1967/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench; CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 1967 of 2026; Shivraj Singh v. State of U.P.; Rajeev Bharti, J.; decided March 23, 2026; bail granted under U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Sections 2/3; Case Crime No. 193 of 2019, P.S. Harchandpur, district Raebareli; Section 19(4)(b) undertaking; gang chart solitary case with prior bail; criminal history of two cases explained; in custody since 7.6.2019; personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Shivraj Singh to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the conditions imposed in the interest of justice. ¶26

Shivraj Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, involved in Case Crime No. 193 of 2019 under Sections 2/3 U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, should be enlarged on bail.

¶18

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, that the applicant has been enlarged on bail in the solitary case shown in the gang chart, that his criminal history of two cases has been explained, and the period already spent in jail, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the court found it a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

Bail was granted subject to conditions, including that the applicant shall file an undertaking in terms of the requirement of Section 19(4)(b) of the U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 that he will not indulge in any case or misuse the liberty of bail; in case of default of this condition, the trial court may treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Sections 2/3 — Case Crime No. 193 of 2019, P.S. Harchandpur, district Raebareli — applicant in jail since 7.6.2019 — one solitary case shown in the gang chart in which the applicant was already enlarged on bail; criminal history of two more cases explained in supplementary affidavit — applicant ready to furnish undertaking under Section 19(4)(b) — held a fit case for bail without expressing any opinion on merits; released on personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, with conditions including undertaking under Section 19(4)(b) not to indulge in any case or misuse the liberty of bail — bail application allowed.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1967 of 2026

Shivraj Singh

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

¶7

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

¶8

Court No. - 28

¶9

HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J.

¶10

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

¶11

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the gang chart, one case has been shown against the applicant. In that solitary case, the applicant has been enlarged on bail. The bail order is on record (Annexure-3). Apart from the said case, the applicant has a criminal history of two more cases which have been explained in the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 7.6.2019.

¶12

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 Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.

¶13

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.

¶14

3. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶15

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, the applicant has been enlarged on bail in the case shown in the gang chart, the criminal history of two cases

¶16

BAIL No. 1967 of 2026

¶17

¶18

has been explained, as noted above, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, for the period for which he is in jail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶19

5. Let the applicant Shivraj Singh, involved in Case Crime No.193 of 2019 under Sections 2/3 U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Harchandpur, district Raebareli 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 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.

¶22

(iii) 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.

¶23

(iv) 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.

¶24

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.

¶25

(vi)Any other condition which the trial court may deem fit and proper may also be imposed.

¶26

6. The bail application is allowed accordingly.

¶27

(Rajeev Bharti,J.)

¶28

March 23, 2026 kkb/

¶29

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shivraj Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivraj Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Similar cases

Mahesh Kapoor vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Vijay Shankar @ Sunil vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Dileep Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Niyaz vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Ankit Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Anjani Dwivedi @ Gagan @ Aditya vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.