Nanhe vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has filed the instant application seeking direction to the trial court to accept and consider a personal bond and two sureties in one criminal case and treat the same valid in all nine criminal cases in which the applicant has already been granted bail. The details of nine cases are delineated below :-

"(i) Case Crime No. 210/2025, Under Sections- 331(4)/305(A) BNS, P.S. Neemgaon, District Lakhimpur Kheri.

(ii) Case Crime No. 221/ 2025, Under Sections- 331(4)/305(A) BNS, P.S.Neemgaon, District Lakhimpur Kheri

(iii) Case Crime No. 222/ 2025, Under Sections- 331(4)/305(A) BNS, P.S.Neemgaon, District Lakhimpur Kheri

(iv) Case Crime No. 269/ 2025, Under Sections- 331(4)/305(A) BNS, P.S.Neemgaon, District Lakhimpur Kheri

(v) Case Crime No. 270/ 2025, Under Sections- 331(4)/305(A) BNS, P.S.Neemgaon, District Lakhimpur Kheri

NA528 No. 2403 of 2026

2

(vi) Case Crime No. 271/ 2025, Under Sections- 331(4)/305(A) BNS, P.S.Neemgaon, District Lakhimpur Kheri

(vii) Case Crime No. 272/ 2025, Under Sections- 331(4)/305(A) BNS, P.S.Neemgaon, District Lakhimpur Kheri

(viii) Case Crime No. 172/ 2025, Under Sections- 305(A)/317(2)/331(4) BNS, P.S.Maigalganj, District Lakhimpur Kheri

(ix) Case Crime No. 180/ 2025, Under Sections- 305(A)/317(2)/331(4) BNS, P.S.Maigalganj, District Lakhimpur Kheri"

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there are nine cases against the applicant and he is unable to furnish bail bonds separately in each case, as such, the concerned trial court may be directed to release the applicant on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount in all the nine cases. He further submits that in similar circumstances, namely, in the case of Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh, 2018 Supreme (SC) 2090 , the Supreme Court vide order dated 29.10.2018 has permitted the petitioner to submit a personal bond and two sureties of like amount to hold good in all the cases. He has further placed reliance on a judgment passed by this Court in Bacchi Devi vs. State of U.P., 2025 SCC Online All 5286 in aforesaid regard. 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) as well as in Bacchi Devi (supra).

Sri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. has no objection to the aforesaid request as the matter has already been settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Hani Nishad (supra) and by this Court in the matter of Bacchi Devi (supra) .

Considering the aforesaid facts, the concerned trial court is directed to accept 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, in the light of judgments passed in Hani

NA528 No. 2403 of 2026

3

Nishad (supra) and Bacchi Devi (supra) . .