Allahabad High Court
Sanjay vs State Of U.P. on 14 May, 2024
Author: Vivek Varma
Bench: Vivek Varma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:86916
Court No. - 86
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7982 of 2024
Applicant :- Sanjay
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Prem Chandra Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicant as well as Sri V.K. Tiwari, learned A.G.A. for the State, and perused the record.
2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the order dated 25.01.2024 passed by the Incharge Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra in Case Crime No. 48 of 2023, under Sections 380, 457, 411 I.P.C., Police Station Shahganj, District Agra and to direct the trial Court not to insist the applicant to file separate surety bonds in the eleven criminal cases and to accept one surety in lieu of all eleven cases mentioned below.
3. The applicant is stated to be involved in following eleven cases and obtained bail orders:
(i) Case Crime No. 48 of 2023, under Sections 380, 457, 411 I.P.C., Police Station Shahganj, District Agra.
(ii) Case Crime No. 34 of 2023, under Sections 457, 411, 413 I.P.C., Police Station Shahganj, District Agra.
(iii) Case Crime No. 40 of 2023, under Sections 457, 411, 413 I.P.C., Police Station Shahganj, District Agra.
(iv) Case Crime No. 38 of 2023, under Sections 457, 411, 413 I.P.C., Police Station Shahganj, District Agra.
(v) Case Crime No. 54 of 2023, under Sections 457, 411, 413 I.P.C., Police Station Shahganj, District Agra.
(vi) Case Crime No. 580 of 2022, under Sections 380, 457, 411 I.P.C., Police Station Shahganj, District Agra.
(vii) Case Crime No. 430 of 2009, under Sections 380, 457, 411 I.P.C., Police Station Shahganj, District Agra.
(viii) Case Crime No. 133 of 2009, under Sections 457, 380, 411 I.P.C., Police Station Shahganj, District Agra.
(ix) Case Crime No. 651 of 2022, under Sections 380, 457, 411, 413 I.P.C., Police Station Jagdishpura, District Agra.
(x) Case Crime No. 84 of 2023, under Sections 380, 457, 411, 413 I.P.C., Police Station Jagdishpura, District Agra.
(xi) Case Crime No. 135 of 2022, under Sections 380, 457, 411 I.P.C., Police Station Nai Ki Mandi, District Agra.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court as well as of this Court, in which it has been held that sureties and personal bond submitted in one case be accepted for all remaining cases. The particular of the cases of Apex Court and this Court are as follows:
(i) Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky vs. The State Of Uttar Pradesh, S.L.P. (Crl.) No(s). 8914-8915 of 2018, decided on 29.10.2018.
(ii) Subhash Kumar vs. State of U.P., Application U/S 482 No.20575 of 2021, decided by this Court on 27.10.2021.
(iii) Sattan Yadav, Vs. State of U.P., Application U/S 482 No.14618 of 2022, decided by this Court on 13.10.2022.
5. He further submitted that impugned order has been passed in arbitrary manner without considering the ratio of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky (Supra).
6. On the other hand, learned AGA for the State submitted that impugned order has been passed in accordance with law.
7. I have considered the arguments advanced by the both the parties and perused the record.
8. There is no dispute about the fact that applicant has been granted bail in all the eleven cases lodged against him. There is also no dispute about the fact that application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 48 of 2023, under Sections 380, 457, 411 I.P.C., Police Station Shahganj, District Agra with the prayer that sureties and bond of one case be accepted for remaining cases. However, the Incharge Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra has rejected the application filed by applicant vide order dated 25.01.2024.
9. The Apex Court in case of Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky (Supra) has clearly held that same bond shall hold good for all 31 cases. The relevant paragraphs of the judgment are as follows:
"Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner is said to have been involved in 31 criminal cases for various offences.
The Trial Court granted bail in all the 31 cases by different orders inter alia on condition of arranging two sureties each in all the cases.
The petitioner moved the High Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, contending that it was impossible for the petitioner to arrange 62 sureties.
It is the case of the petitioner that the High Court had in similar circumstances granted bail to the petitioner with two sureties of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) in the case under Gangster Act and the same sureties were to be the sureties in all other cases as well, by an order dated 21.9.2017. The petitioner was directed to execute personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- in each case.
However, by the impugned order, the High Court has modified the conditions of bail imposed by the Trial Court in the instant cases by directing the Trial Court to accept one common surety for all the cases and one surety each for the 31 cases.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even though the Court has granted bail to the petitioner, the petitioner is unable to execute the bail bonds because of the onerous conditions of bail imposed particularly the condition of producing 31 sureties.
Considering the submissions, the impugned order is modified to the extent that the petitioner shall execute a personal bond for Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand only) and the same bond shall hold good for all 31 cases. There shall be two sureties who shall execute the bond for Rs. 30,000/- which bond shall hold good for all the 31 cases. It is clarified that the personal bond so executed by the Petitioner and the bond so executed by the two sureties shall hold good for all the 31 cases.
With these observations, the Special Leave Petitions are disposed of.
Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of."
10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as ratio of law laid down by the Apex Court in Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky (Supra) the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant is allowed and the impugned order dated 25.01.2024 passed by the Incharge Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra in the aforesaid Case Crime No. 48 of 2023 is set aside. It is further directed that applicant shall furnish personal bond and sureties in one case which shall be accepted for remaining ten cases and the same shall deemed to be adequate compliance of all the bail orders.
11. With the aforesaid observations, the application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 14.5.2024
SKT/-
