Indal v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. (Home) Lko.

Allahabad HC12 Mar 2026NA528/894/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Common/single bail bond across multiple cases; one personal bond and two sureties accepted for all four cases; Section 528 BNSS application; Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky Vs. State of U.P., SLP (Cri) No.8914-8915 of 2018 (SC, 29.10.2018); release on bail; Indal v. State of U.P.; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Brij Raj Singh, J.; disposed of on March 12, 2026.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the trial court to accept one personal bond and two sureties to its satisfaction in all four cases mentioned in paragraph-5 of the application and release the applicant on bail. ¶¶17

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

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 894 of 2026

Indal

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. (Home) Lko.

¶7

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Pankaj Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 16

¶9

HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

¶10

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

¶11

The present application has been filed seeking a direction to the court concerned to accept a personal bond and two sureties in all four cases mentioned in paragraph-5 of the memo of application.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is involved in four 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 four cases mentioned in paragraph-5 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.

¶13

Learned AGA does not dispute the aforesaid legal proposition.

¶14

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 four cases mentioned in paragraph-5 of the application and release the applicant on bail.

¶15

NA528 No. 894 of 2026

¶16

¶17

6. Application stands disposed of.

¶18

(Brij Raj Singh,J.)

¶19

March 12, 2026 Sachin

¶20

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

Indal v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. (Home) Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indal v. State of U.P. Thru. 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

Zaki Ahmad and 5 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

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

Himanshu Sunilkumar Dubey vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Govind Uttamchandani vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Aditya Nath Tripathi and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Darakhsha Parveen @ Chandni vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and Another