Allowed

Mohit and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Aug 2024A482/25993/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicants granted bail in three criminal cases could not furnish separate sureties for each case due to poverty. The High Court held the demand for multiple sureties unreasonable and directed the Chief Judicial Magistrate to treat sureties for one case as valid for the other two.

What did the court decide?

Sureties for Case Crime No. 135 of 2024 to be treated as sureties for Case Crime Nos. 136 of 2024 and 296 of 2023/2024; trial court directed accordingly.

Mohit and Another Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:129955

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25993 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mohit And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dipendra Kumar,Pradeep Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and perused material on record.

¶7

By means of the present application, the applicant has sought for a suitable direction to the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Muzaffar Nagar to consider sureties and personal bond in one case treating the same for all three cases, in which the applicants have been granted bail by the trial court.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been enlarged on bail by the trial Court in three cases; (i) vide order dated 18.07.2024 in case crime no. 135 of 2024, under Sections 380, 411, 457 IPC and Section 4/25 Arms Act, P.S. Chhapar, District Muzaffar Nagar on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- each with two sureties; (ii) vide order dated 22.07.2024 in case crime no. 136 of 2024, under Section 380, 458, 411 IPC and Section 4/25 Arms Act, P.S. Chhapar, District Muzaffar Nagar on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1 lac with two sureties in the the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned; (iii) vide order dated 23.07.2024 in case crime no. 296 of 20234, under Section 380, 411, 457 IPC and Section 4/25 of Arms Act, P.S. Chhapar, District Muzaffar Nagar on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- each with two sureties.

¶9

The trial court has directed to file a separate personal bonds and two sureties for each case. However the applicants have not been set at liberty as they are unable to arrange sureties in aforesaid cases due to financial and lack of human resources. The applicants are languishing in jail since 28.06.2024.

¶10

The prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants may be permitted to produce a single surety for the aforesaid three cases so that they are set at liberty in pursuance of the bail order.

¶11

Per-contra, learned A.G.A. contends that sureties serve an important role in securing presence of accused before the court. But fairly admits that sureties should be just and reasonable.

¶12

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the applicants, this Court finds that the demand of multiple sureties is unreasonable.

¶13

The right of fundamental liberties of the applicants are being curtailed on account of his poverty and inability to arrange multiple sureties for cases instituted against them.

¶14

The trial court is directed to execute the following directions:

¶15

The Sureties for Case Crime No. 135 of 2024, under Sections 380, 411, 457 IPC and Section 4/25 Arms Act, P.S. Chhapar, District Muzaffar Nagar shall also be treated as sureties for the two cases as well outlined hereunder;

¶16

(i) Case Crime No. 136 of 2024, under Section 380, 458, 411 IPC and Section 4/25 Arms Act, P.S. Chhapar, District Muzaffar Nagar;

¶17

(ii) Case Crime no. 296 of 20234, under Section 380, 411, 457 IPC and Section 4/25 of Arms Act, P.S. Chhapar, District Muzaffar Nagar.

¶18

With the aforesaid observations the application is allowed .

¶19

Order Date :- 8.8.2024 A. Tripathi

¶20

Justice Vinod Diwakar

¶21

Digitally signed by :- AKHILESH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohit and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohit and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases