Disposed

Gurudeen v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Allahabad HC16 Jan 2024/299/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of an application seeking to relax bail conditions for an accused facing six cases. Permission was granted to file personal bonds with two sureties in one case, which would suffice for all other cases due to unavailability of twelve sureties.

What did the court decide?

Permitted applicant to file personal bonds in all cases; directed to furnish two sureties in one case, valid for all other cases where bail is granted.

Gurudeen Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:4087

¶2

Court No. - 11 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 299 of 2024 Applicant :- Gurudeen Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh,Girish Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Nusrat Jahan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶5

By means this petition, the petitioner has prayed to relax the condition of bail to the extent that accused applicant be allowed to file two sureties in any case and the same shall be treated adequate in all three cases in which he has already been bailed out.

¶6

It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that against the petitioner/ applicant there are six cases in which he has already been granted bail, but because of non-availability of about twelve sureties, he is unable to file bail bonds, therefore, in this regard a prayer has been made that the petitioner/ applicant may be permitted to file two sureties in all the cases. It is also stated that in similarly situated matters, this Court has granted relief.

¶7

It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in similar circumstances, namely, in the case of Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh [SLP (Crl.) No. 8914-8915/2018) , the Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated 29.10.2018 has permitted the petitioner to submit personal bonds and two sureties of heavy amount to hold good in all the cases. Similarly, orders have been passed by a coordinate bench of this Court as well and one of such orders in Writ Petition (MS) No. 30481 of 2018 (Imran Vs. State of U.P.) decided on 16.11.2018, has also been filed.

¶8

In view of the above circumstances, this petition is disposed of finally with a direction that petitioner shall file personal bonds in all the cases, however, two sureties in one case shall be furnished to the satisfaction of the Court concerned which shall be treated valid in all other cases wherein bail has been granted.

¶9

Order Date :- 16.1.2024 Om

¶10

Digitally signed by :- OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Gurudeen v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurudeen v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Anil Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Raju Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addil. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Home Govt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Jai Prakash Prajapati Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Brij Ballabh Sharma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home and Another

Pankaj Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Noor Ahmadi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and 7 Others