Disposed¶14

Ranjeet v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Allahabad HC19 Mar 2026NA528/1102/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Common/single bail bond across multiple cases; one personal bond and two sureties accepted for five cases; direction to trial court under S. 528 BNSS; reliance on Supreme Court order in Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky v. State of U.P., SLP (Cri) Nos. 8914-8915 of 2018 (29.10.2018); Ranjeet v. State of U.P.; Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench; Brij Raj Singh, J.; decided 19.03.2026; bail bonds and sureties; release on bail.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the trial court to accept one personal bond and two sureties to its satisfaction in all five cases mentioned in paragraph-6 of the application and release the applicant on bail. ¶14

Ranjeet vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 1102 of 2026

¶3

Ranjeet

¶4

		.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt.	Lko.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	:	Amit Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 16

¶6

HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

¶7

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

¶8

The present application has been filed seeking a direction to the court concerned to accept a personal bond and two sureties in all five cases mentioned in paragraph-6 of the memo of application.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is involved in five cases and has been granted bail, but he is unable to provide separate bail bonds and sureties in all cases. He, therefore, prays that trial court may be directed to accept the same bail bond and sureties in all five cases mentioned in paragraph-6 of the memo of application. In support of his submission, he has placed reliance upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Cri) No.8914-8915 of 2018, Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky Vs. State of U.P., dated 29.10.2018 to establish that the Supreme Court in the aforesaid case has directed to accept one personal bond and two sureties for all cases.

¶10

Learned AGA does not dispute the aforesaid legal proposition.

¶11

NA528 No. 1102 of 2026

¶12

¶13

Keeping in view the aforesaid submissions and the dictum of the Supreme Court in this regard, the trial court is directed to accept one personal bond and two sureties to its satisfaction in all five cases mentioned in paragraph-6 of the application and release the applicant on bail.

¶14

Application stands disposed of.

¶15

March 19, 2026

¶16

Sachin

¶17

(Brij Raj Singh,J.)

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MEHROTRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ranjeet v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjeet v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Himanshu Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ashutosh Tiwari vs State of U.P. Thru. a.C.S./Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Saddam and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Prem Narayan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Abhishek vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Gyan Chandra Shukla @ Tehsildar and 4 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 3 Others