Disposed¶23

Shyam Sundar @ Golu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC17 Apr 2026NA528/1474/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 1474 of 2026, Shyam Sundar @ Golu v. State of U.P. (G.A.), counsel Ashish Kumar/Kamaluddin/Sindhuja Tiwari; common-surety direction: one personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties of like amount in one case held valid across six bail cases (ss. 305(A), 317(2), 331(4) B.N.S., Lucknow); relied on SC order dated 29.10.2018 in Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky, SLP (Crl.) Nos. 8914-8915/2018; disposed on 17-04-2026 by Shree Prakash Singh, J.

What did the court decide?

Direction that the applicant furnish one personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties of the like amount in one case, to be treated as valid in all other cases wherein bail orders have been passed. ¶23

Shyam Sundar @ Golu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 1474 of 2026

Shyam Sundar @ Golu

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashish Kumar, Kamaluddin, Sindhuja Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 16

¶9

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

¶10

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

¶11

By means of the instant application, the applicant has prayed that this Court may be pleased to direct the learned trial court not to insist the applicant to file separate sureties and bonds in each and every six cases and accept only two sureties and one personal bond in lieu of all the three cases.

¶12

The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that it has become impossible for the applicant to submit separate sureties and bonds in each of cases, in which, he has been granted bail. He added that the applicant has been granted bail in six cases arising out of following Case Crime Numbers :-

¶13

A. Case Crime No. 134/2025, U/S-305 (A), 331 (4) B.N.S police Station-Cant, District-Lucknow.

¶14

B. Case Crime No. 127/2025, u/s 305 (A), 331 (4) B.N.S., Police Station-Cant, District-Lucknow.

¶15

C. Case Crime No.28/2026, u/s 305 (A), 331 (4) 317 (2) B.N.S., Police Station-Vibhuti Khand, District-Lucknow.

¶16

D. Case Crime No 37/2026, U/S-305 (A), 317 (2) 331 (4) B.N.S police Station-Vibhuti Khand, District-Lucknow

¶17

E. Case Crime No 14/2026, U/S-305 (A), 317(2),331 (4)B.N.S police Station-Vibhuti Khand, District-Lucknow

¶18

NA528 No. 1474 of 2026

¶19

¶20

F.Case Crime No 27/2026, U/S-305 (A), 317(2), 331 (4)B.N.S police Station-Vibhuti Khand, District-Lucknow

¶21

He next added that despite the Trial Court granted the bail in aforesaid matters, the applicant is still in jail. Being poo person, he is unable to produce the sureties in each cases. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant 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 Supreme Court vide order dated 29.10.2018 has permitted the petitioners to submit separate personal bonds and two sureties of heavy amount to hold good in all the cases.

¶22

Referring the aforesaid judgement and order, he submits that the applicant may also be given the benefit of the ratio of the judgement passed in Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky (supra) .

¶23

Considering the aforesaid fact, the petition is disposed off with a direction to the applicant to furnish a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/and two sureties of the like amount in one case, which shall be treated to be valid in all other cases wherein the bail orders have been passed.

¶24

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

¶25

April 17, 2026 AKS

¶26

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shyam Sundar @ Golu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyam Sundar @ Golu 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sarfaraj vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Mohd. Raheel Siddiqui and Others vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Abdullah vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Panna Lal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 5 Others

Vikki Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Vinod Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Affairs Deptt. Lko. and Another