HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35118 of 2026 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J. 1. Sri Ram Kishor Mishra, learned counsel for the informant is one of the case, has hands up vakalatnama, the same is taken on record. 1A. Sri Satya Narayan Yadav, learned counsel has hands up supplementary affidavit explaining criminal history, the same is taken on record. 1B. Heard Sri Yadav, learned counsel for accused applicants, Sri Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for State. 2. The present bail application has been moved by the accused applicants- Neelesh Kumar, Ravi Kumar and Nitin @ Sonu to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 676 of 2026, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S.- Shikohabad, District- Firozabad, during the pendency of trial. 3. It is the contention of learned counsel for applicants that the accused applicants have been falsely implicated by the police under the provision of Gangsters Act on the basis of two base cases, in which applicants are on bail. Apart from it, applicant no.1 has one case criminal history, wherein, he is on bail; there is no other criminal history of the accused applicant no.2 and accused applicant no.3 has three cases criminal history, wherein, he is on bail. The investigation is continuing. The accused applicants are languishing in jail since 1.9.2026. He seeks enlargement of accused on bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Satya Narayan Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Neelesh Kumar And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 4. Learned A.G.A. for State opposed the bail application. 5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. Hon'ble The Supreme Court in the case of Shiv Pratap Singh Alias Chinu Vs. State of U.P. & Ors reported in 2026 SCC Online SC 1677 has considered the proceedings initiated under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 and the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021 and found that the Act is still born and the proceedings initiated under it can not survive. Hence, if the proceedings under the Act can not survive in view of the dictum of Hon'ble The Supreme Court dealt herein above, the incarceration of accused/applicant under the provision of the Act has no legal basis. 7. Considered that the criminal history is explained and in the light of aforesaid judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court, the accused/applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 8.Hence, without touching merit of the case, the bail application is allowed. 9. The accused/applicant be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned in view of observation made by the Supreme Court in its dictums of Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh [(2024) 10 SCC 674] and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in re [(2024)10SCC 685]. 10. The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and speedy disposal. October 1, 2026 Krishna* BAIL No. 35118 of 2026 2 (Avnish Saxena,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad