Partly allowed¶11

Alok Kumar Singhal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Surety quantum – release of stolen property to owner

Allahabad HC11 Jul 2025NA528/732/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Subhash Vidyarthi, J.; Order dated 11.7.2025; Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 732 of 2025; Alok Kumar Singhal v. State of U.P.; reduction of personal bond and surety from Rs. 50 lakhs to Rs. 25 lakhs for release of stolen goods recovered by police; Case Crime No. 20 of 2025, Ss. 318(2)/316(2) BNS, PS Chowk, Lucknow; order of ACJM (Ayodhya Prakaran) Lucknow dated 23.06.2025 modified; application partly allowed; surety disproportionate to value of goods; production of recovered goods as and when required.

What did the court decide?

Personal bond and surety reduced from Rs. 50 lakhs to Rs. 25 lakhs; impugned order dated 23.06.2025 modified accordingly. ¶11

Alok Kumar Singhal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 732 of 2025 Applicant :- Alok Kumar Singhal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

¶3

Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Chandra,Jitendra Kushwaha

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Vivek Chandra, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shikhar Srivastava, the learned A.G.A appearing on behalf of the State.

¶7

By means of the instant application filed under Section 528 BNSS, the applicant has challenged the validity of an order dated 23.06.2025 passed by the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, (Ayodhya Prakaran), Lucknow in Case Crime No. 20 of 2025, under Section 318 (2), 316(2) BNS, Police Station Chowk, District Lucknow, whereby while allowing the applicant's application for release of goods that were stolen from his place and recovered by the police, the trial court has directed him to furnish the personal bond and a surety of Rs. 50 lakhs.

¶8

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the amount of surety is very high, it is much more than the value of the goods and when the goods belonged to the applicant himself and have been stolen from his place, asking the applicant to submit a personal bond and a surety for Rs. 50 lakhs would defeat the ends of justice.

¶9

The learned A.G.A has opposed the aforesaid request and he has submitted that surety is necessary to ensure that the applicant will produce the goods recovered as and when required by the trial court.

¶10

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the amount of personal bond and surety can be reduced to Rs. 25 lakhs to strike a balance between the rights of the applicant and the concern of the prosecution.

¶11

Accordingly, the instant application is partly allowed .

¶12

The impugned order dated 23.06.2025 passed by the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, (Ayodhya Prakaran), Lucknow is modified to the extent that the amount of personal bond and a surety is reduced from Rs. 50 lakhs to 25 lakhs.

¶13

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

¶14

Order Date :- 11.7.2025 Preeti.

¶15

Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Alok Kumar Singhal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alok Kumar Singhal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ravi Gupta and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Mo. Firoz Khan @ Firoz Khan Vs Prin. Judge Family Court Sultanpur and Another

Dileram Maurya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Sushant Sharma vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Alok Kumar Singhal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Tansen @ Lodhai Chauhan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others