Mohd. Sameer Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Civil Secy. Lko. — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Mohd. Sameer Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Civil Secy. Lko. — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Permission, in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky (supra), to furnish two sureties and one personal bond for all three cases; the Court below directed to execute a personal bond of Rs. 20,000/- in every case and to accept two sureties in the like amount furnished in one case, which shall hold good for the rest of the cases.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, who has been granted bail by the court below in all three cases registered against him, may be permitted to submit two sureties and one personal bond common to all three cases instead of furnishing huge sureties separately in each case in compliance of the bail orders.

Court's answer

The present application stands disposed of finally in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky (supra).

Ratio / Principle

The Court below is directed to execute the personal bond of Rs. 20,000/- in every case and to take two sureties each in the like amount.

Key takeaways

Two sureties furnished to the satisfaction of the Court/Magistrate concerned in one case shall hold good for the rest of the cases.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (Saurabh Lavania, J.) — Application U/S 482 No. 8152 of 2024, Mohd. Sameer v. State of U.P.; order dated 11.9.2024. The applicant, stated to have been granted bail by the court below in three cases registered against him in District Lucknow — Case Crime No. 0158 of 2024, Case Crime No. 0161/2024 and Crime No. 0136/2024, each under Sections 379 & 411 IPC, Police Station GRP (Charbagh) — sought permission to submit two sureties and one personal bond common to all three cases, pleading that being very poor he could not furnish huge sureties in each and every case in compliance of the bail orders. Learned counsel relied on the Apex Court judgment in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 8914-8915 of 2018, Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky v. State of U.P.; the learned A.G.A. chose not to file any counter affidavit. Disposing of the application finally in the light of the law laid down in Hani Nishad (supra), the Court directed the court below to execute a personal bond of Rs. 20,000/- in every case and to accept two sureties in the like amount furnished to the satisfaction of the Court/Magistrate concerned in one case, which shall hold good for the rest of the cases.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:62647

Court No. - 13

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8152 of 2024 Applicant :- Mohd. Sameer Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Civil Secy. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Mahesh Singh Yadav,Suresh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

The instant application , has been filed by the applicant to permit him to submit two sureties and one personal bond for all three cases from the applicant and applicant has been granted bail in all cases by the court below.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in all three cases. He next submitted that in all the cases registered against the applicant, he has been granted bail by the court below. He says that the applicant is very poor person and not in a position to furnish huge sureties in each and every case in compliance of bail orders. It is further submitted that the details of cases registered against applicant in District Lucknow are as follows:-

(i) Case Crime No. 0158 of 2024 Under Section 379 & 411 IPC, Police Station-GRP,

(ii) Case Crime Number 0161/2024 under section 379 & 411 I.P.C. Police Station-GRP

(iii) Crime Number 0136/2024 under section 379 & 411 I.P.C. Police Station-GRP Charbagh,

Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 8914-8915 of 2018; Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky Vs. State of U.P.

Learned A.G.A. submits that he does not want to file any counter affidavit.

In view of the facts and circumstances as well as rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for both the parties, the present application stands disposed of finally in the light law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky (Supra) and the Court below is directed to execute the personal bond of Rs. 20,000/- in every case and produce two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court/Magistrate concerned in one case which shall hold good for rest of the cases.

Order Date :- 11.9.2024

Jyoti/-

Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench