SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(All) 1211

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Vivek Varma, J
ANAS URF POPA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U.P. – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14416 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Rajesh Kumar Tiwari
For the Respondents: G.A.

Bail may be granted under the Gangsters Act if the FIR is based on pending cases without new specific allegations of disturbing public order and the applicant has been granted bail in the underlying cases.

Headnote:The applicant sought bail under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, in relation to Case Crime No. 01 of 2026. It was submitted that the applicant had already been granted bail in the case mentioned in the gang chart as well as in eleven other cases. The court found that the allegations regarding the disturbance of public order were vague and the FIR was based on pending criminal cases rather than new facts reflecting a serious impact on society. The primary issue was whether the applicant was entitled to bail given the nature of the charges. The court reasoned that in the absence of specific acts or omissions fitting the definition of 'gang' or 'gangster' under Section 2 of the Act, and taking note of Section 19(4)(b) of the Act, the applicant is entitled to be released, provided they do not tamper with evidence or influence witnesses. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

Table of Content
1. procedural initiation of bail application. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments regarding prior bails and vague allegations. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
3. court's determination on eligibility for bail. (Para 7)
4. grant of bail with specific conditions. (Para 8 , 9)

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri V.P.Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

2. The instant bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 01 of 2026, under Section 2 /3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Wave City, District Ghaziabad during the pendency of the trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the gang chart, one case is shown against the applicant and in the said case the applicant has been enlarged on bail. It is next contended that apart from the case mentioned in the gang chart, the applicant is involved in eleven cases. In the said cases also he has been enlarged on bail.

4. He further submits that in the F.I.R., in issue, the allegations with regard to disturbing the public order, as also regarding gaining undue temporal, pecuniary, material or other advantage of like nature against the applicant are vague. In absence of allegation concerning an act or omission on the part of an accused, covered by the definition of terms "gang" and "gangster" as provided under Section 2 of the Gangsters Act, no F.I.R. is maintainable. In the instant case, the F.I.R. is based upon the pending criminal cases and not upon any new allegations or discovery of facts having serious reflection on the society, for which purpose the Gangsters Act was enacted.

5. It is also submitted that considering the facts of the case, as stated above, there are reasonable grounds for believing that the applicant is not guilty of the offence under the Gangsters Act and that he would not commit the offence while on bail nor would try to tamper the evidence or influence the witnesses in any manner whatsoever it may be. The applicant is in jail since 18.03.2026.

6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

7. Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record as well as taking note of Section 19(4)(b) of the Gangsters Act, in light of the submission of counsel for the applicant to the effect that while on bail in this case, the applicant would not commit any crime/offence nor would try to tamper the evidence or influence the witnesses in any manner, whatsoever it may be, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

8. Let the applicant- Anas @ Popa, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that:

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court; and,

(v) shall appear on first Sunday of every month at the Police Station concerned.

9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top