High Court · 2025

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J. Heard Shri Pradeep Kumar, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Shri Uma Nath Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Manish Goyal, learned Senior Advocate and Additional Advocate General, assisted by Shri J.K.Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records. The instant Bail Application at the instance of the applicant Deo Sharma S/o Shri Bhishma Sharma, has been filed seeking enlargement on Bail in Case Crime No. 02 of 2024, under Sections 2(b)(i), 2(b)(iii), 2(b) (iv), 2(b) (viii), 2(b) (xi), 2(b)(xii) and Section 3 of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station-Beta-2, District-Gautam Budh Nagar, during the pendency of the trial before the Court below. The applicant is stated to have applied for bail in the aforesaid Case Crime No. 2 of 2024 and but the same was rejected by the additional District and Sessions Judge-VI/ Special Judge, Gangster act, District-Gautam Budh Nagar, vide order dated 07.02.2025 and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 20.01.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated this very case crime number for ulterior motives. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the First Information Report giving rise to Case Crime No. 2 of 2024 was registered at Police Station-Beta-2, District Gautam Budh Nagar, on 02.01.2024 against 16 named accused in which one Ravi Nagar @ Ravindra Singh @ Ravi Kana was shown as gang leader and 15 accused persons were shown as gang members. The charge sheet was filed against the named persons. The applicant was not named in the First Information Report nor was charge sheeted. The applicant was however arrested after more than 12 months from the date of lodging of the First Information Report i.e. on 20.01.2025 and his complicity was established with the gang in G.D. No. 085. After his arrest the applicant was falsely implicated in Case Crime No. 183 of 2022 under Section 341, 386 IPC, Police station Kasna, District-Gautam Budh Nagar as also in Case Crime No. 32 of 2025, under Section 308 (5) & 61 (2) BNS, Police Station-Beta-2, Gautam Budh Nagar. In both the case the applicant was enlarged on bail vide order dated 31.01.2025 passed by the Sessions Judge. It is argued that the present case under the Gangster Act was lodged by the Station House Officer, Police Station-Beta-2, to circumvent the bail orders. It has also been argued that in the gang chart dated 28.01.2025 only one case i.e. Case Crime No. 183 of 2022, under Section 386 and 341 IPC has been shown against the applicant. The applicant has already been enlarged on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime Number. Besides the above case the applicant has a criminal history of 8 other cases which have been duly explained in para 15 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. The details of the criminal cases against the applicant reveal that the offences alleged do not come within the ambit of Section 2 of the U.P. Gangsters Act. It is also argued that the named co accused of Case Crime No. 2 of 2024, namely Prahlad, Rashid Ali, Afsar Ali, Smt. Madhu, Vikky @ Daulat, Anil, Aman, Vishal, Azad, Awadh @ Bihari @ Amar Singh, Kumari Kajal Jha, Vikash, Tarun Chhaukar, Mali @ Mohkar and Raj Kumar, have already been enlarged on bail and bail orders have collectively been filed on record as Annexure 15 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. It has also been argued that the applicant is a Director of a Private Limited Company, involved in construction business and is being implicated in false and frivolous cases on account of affinity with one Pankaj Parasar who is a journalist by profession against whom the police is annoyed. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant undertakes to fully cooperate with the trial and shall not misuse the liberty granted if released on bail. Hence prayer for bail is made. Per contra, Shri Manish Goyal, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State in opposition to the bail plea submits that the applicant is an active member of a gang of which one Ravi Nagar @ Ravindra Singh @ Ravi Kana is the gang leader. The gang is involved in stopping the trucks carrying Saria going to various construction sites and in connivance with the driver off load large quantities of 'Saria' and get recorded the full weight in the stock book by threatening the site manager and thereafter earn huge profits by selling the Saria in the open market. The gang also pressurises various business establishments to grant contracts regarding scraps in favour of its members at desired rates in the names of their companies and benami Companies. The gang has committed crimes mentioned in Chapter 16,17 and 22 of the IPC. The activities of the gang has created a feeling of insecurity amongst investors, traders and general public. During investigation the name of the applicant Deo Sharma, Pankaj Parashar and Awadhesh Sisodia has surfaced. On the basis of evidence collected during the investigation the gang is alleged to have transacted to the tune of Rs. 1,86,67,66,683/- Crores and the applicant is alleged to have transacted to the tune of Rs. 18,47,76,793/- through his ICICI Bank Account No. 1-81601-530409. A sum of Rs. 1.50 Lakhs has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. It has, accordingly, been urged that the applicant does not deserve the liberty of bail and the bail application is liable to be rejected. Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the above submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the records. Admittedly the applicant, Deo Sharma is not named in the F.I.R. dated 02.01.2024 giving rise to Case Crime No. 2 of 2024. The applicant was arrested after over 12 months of the lodging of the FIR. The applicant was not initially charge-sheeted and his complicity has been established in GD No. 085. In the supplementary gang chart only one case i.e. Case Crime No. 183 of 2022, under Sections 341, 386 of I.P.C. has been shown in which the applicant has already been enlarged on bail. The other criminal antecedents of the applicant have been duly explained in Para 15 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application which has not been controverted by the State. The named co- accused of Case Crime No. 02 of 2024 have already been enlarged on bail. The applicant has also been enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 0086 of 2025, under Section 191(2), 333, 351(2), 352, 308 of B.N.S., Police Station Bisrakh, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, vide order dated 21.03.2025. The said case was lodged after lodging of the FIR giving rise to the Case Crime No. 2 of 2024 under the Gangsters Act, 1986. The applicant in the rejoinder affidavit has explained the recovery of Rs. 1.50 Lacs from his possession. No property of the applicant under Section 14(1) of the U.P. Gangsters Act 1986 has been attached. It appears that on the basis of solitary case shown in the gang chart the applicant has been made accused in the present case. In the solitary case the applicant has already been enlarged on bail. No cancellation of the bail granted has been sought. Apart from the solitary case in the gang chart, the criminal history of 9 cases has been duly explained. In the present case the applicant is in jail since 20.01.2025. Considering all those facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima-facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the accused-applicant, Deo Sharma, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail. Order Date :- 23.4.2025 v.k.updh. VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J. Heard Shri Pradeep Kumar, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Shri Uma Nath Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Manish Goyal, learned Senior Advocate and Additional Advocate General, assisted by Shri J.K.Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records. The instant Bail Application at the instance of the applicant Deo Sharma S/o Shri Bhishma Sharma, has been filed seeking enlargement on Bail in Case Crime No. 02 of 2024, under Sections 2(b)(i), 2(b)(iii), 2(b) (iv), 2(b) (viii), 2(b) (xi), 2(b)(xii) and Section 3 of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station-Beta-2, District-Gautam Budh Nagar, during the pendency of the trial before the Court below. The applicant is stated to have applied for bail in the aforesaid Case Crime No. 2 of 2024 and but the same was rejected by the additional District and Sessions Judge-VI/ Special Judge, Gangster act, District-Gautam Budh Nagar, vide order dated 07.02.2025 and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 20.01.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated this very case crime number for ulterior motives. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the First Information Report giving rise to Case Crime No. 2 of 2024 was registered at Police Station-Beta-2, District Gautam Budh Nagar, on 02.01.2024 against 16 named accused in which one Ravi Nagar @ Ravindra Singh @ Ravi Kana was shown as gang leader and 15 accused persons were shown as gang members. The charge sheet was filed against the named persons. The applicant was not named in the First Information Report nor was charge sheeted. The applicant was however arrested after more than 12 months from the date of lodging of the First Information Report i.e. on 20.01.2025 and his complicity was established with the gang in G.D. No. 085. After his arrest the applicant was falsely implicated in Case Crime No. 183 of 2022 under Section 341, 386 IPC, Police station Kasna, District-Gautam Budh Nagar as also in Case Crime No. 32 of 2025, under Section 308 (5) & 61 (2) BNS, Police Station-Beta-2, Gautam Budh Nagar. In both the case the applicant was enlarged on bail vide order dated 31.01.2025 passed by the Sessions Judge. It is argued that the present case under the Gangster Act was lodged by the Station House Officer, Police Station-Beta-2, to circumvent the bail orders. It has also been argued that in the gang chart dated 28.01.2025 only one case i.e. Case Crime No. 183 of 2022, under Section 386 and 341 IPC has been shown against the applicant. The applicant has already been enlarged on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime Number. Besides the above case the applicant has a criminal history of 8 other cases which have been duly explained in para 15 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. The details of the criminal cases against the applicant reveal that the offences alleged do not come within the ambit of Section 2 of the U.P. Gangsters Act. It is also argued that the named co accused of Case Crime No. 2 of 2024, namely Prahlad, Rashid Ali, Afsar Ali, Smt. Madhu, Vikky @ Daulat, Anil, Aman, Vishal, Azad, Awadh @ Bihari @ Amar Singh, Kumari Kajal Jha, Vikash, Tarun Chhaukar, Mali @ Mohkar and Raj Kumar, have already been enlarged on bail and bail orders have collectively been filed on record as Annexure 15 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. It has also been argued that the applicant is a Director of a Private Limited Company, involved in construction business and is being implicated in false and frivolous cases on account of affinity with one Pankaj Parasar who is a journalist by profession against whom the police is annoyed. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant undertakes to fully cooperate with the trial and shall not misuse the liberty granted if released on bail. Hence prayer for bail is made. Per contra, Shri Manish Goyal, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State in opposition to the bail plea submits that the applicant is an active member of a gang of which one Ravi Nagar @ Ravindra Singh @ Ravi Kana is the gang leader. The gang is involved in stopping the trucks carrying Saria going to various construction sites and in connivance with the driver off load large quantities of 'Saria' and get recorded the full weight in the stock book by threatening the site manager and thereafter earn huge profits by selling the Saria in the open market. The gang also pressurises various business establishments to grant contracts regarding scraps in favour of its members at desired rates in the names of their companies and benami Companies. The gang has committed crimes mentioned in Chapter 16,17 and 22 of the IPC. The activities of the gang has created a feeling of insecurity amongst investors, traders and general public. During investigation the name of the applicant Deo Sharma, Pankaj Parashar and Awadhesh Sisodia has surfaced. On the basis of evidence collected during the investigation the gang is alleged to have transacted to the tune of Rs. 1,86,67,66,683/- Crores and the applicant is alleged to have transacted to the tune of Rs. 18,47,76,793/- through his ICICI Bank Account No. 1-81601-530409. A sum of Rs. 1.50 Lakhs has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. It has, accordingly, been urged that the applicant does not deserve the liberty of bail and the bail application is liable to be rejected. Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the above submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the records. Admittedly the applicant, Deo Sharma is not named in the F.I.R. dated 02.01.2024 giving rise to Case Crime No. 2 of 2024. The applicant was arrested after over 12 months of the lodging of the FIR. The applicant was not initially charge-sheeted and his complicity has been established in GD No. 085. In the supplementary gang chart only one case i.e. Case Crime No. 183 of 2022, under Sections 341, 386 of I.P.C. has been shown in which the applicant has already been enlarged on bail. The other criminal antecedents of the applicant have been duly explained in Para 15 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application which has not been controverted by the State. The named co- accused of Case Crime No. 02 of 2024 have already been enlarged on bail. The applicant has also been enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 0086 of 2025, under Section 191(2), 333, 351(2), 352, 308 of B.N.S., Police Station Bisrakh, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, vide order dated 21.03.2025. The said case was lodged after lodging of the FIR giving rise to the Case Crime No. 2 of 2024 under the Gangsters Act, 1986. The applicant in the rejoinder affidavit has explained the recovery of Rs. 1.50 Lacs from his possession. No property of the applicant under Section 14(1) of the U.P. Gangsters Act 1986 has been attached. It appears that on the basis of solitary case shown in the gang chart the applicant has been made accused in the present case. In the solitary case the applicant has already been enlarged on bail. No cancellation of the bail granted has been sought. Apart from the solitary case in the gang chart, the criminal history of 9 cases has been duly explained. In the present case the applicant is in jail since 20.01.2025. Considering all those facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima-facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the accused-applicant, Deo Sharma, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail. Order Date :- 23.4.2025 v.k.updh. VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad