Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 196625 (ALL)

RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. THE PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER

NABAIL/1670/2025 · 2025-11-10

Karunesh Singh Pawar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1670 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1.Present Anticipatory bail application has been filed in case crime No. 287 of 2025, under section 3(1) U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Jahangirabad, district Barabanki. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record. 3.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that one case is shown in the gang chart, in which the applicant has been enlarged on bail vide order contained in Annexure No.4 to the bail application. Apart from this case, the accused applicant has a criminal history of a petty case under sections 380, 411 I.P.C., in which too, he is enlarged on bail vide order, Annexure No.5 to the bail application. It is submitted that only because there is a criminal history of one case as shown in the Gang chart, the applicant has been booked in the Gangsters case. The applicant undertakes to cooperate in the investigation. 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. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arshad Siddiqui, Devanshu Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rajesh Kumar Maurya .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) 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. 4. Learned Addl. Government Advocate has opposed the prayer made by applicant's counsel. He submits that the investigation is going on. 5..Considering the above aspects of the matter, perusal of the record, prima facie it appears that only because of the criminal history of one case, Gangsters Act has been imposed against the applicant, prima facie ingredients to attract provisions of Section 3(1) of Gangsters Act appear to be missing, the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the investigation, and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant protection to the applicant. 7. 7. In view of the above, it is provided that the applicant shall report to the concerned investigating officer, within 10 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. On such appearance, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the investigating officer/SHO concerned. The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witnesses. 8. In case of default, it would be open for the investigating officer to proceed in accordance with law. 9. The application is allowed accordingly. November 10, 2025 kkb/ NABAIL No. 1670 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench