Allahabad High Court
Case Details
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The instant application under section 528 BNSS has been preferred to direct the concerned Magistrate to release the applicant on bail only on two sureties in regard to all the seven cases, i.e., (i) Case Crime No.1179/2022, Under Section 380 I.P.C., Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat (ii) Case Crime No.812/2023, Under Section 380 I.P.C., Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat (iii) Case Crime No.886 of 2023, Under Section 380 I.P.C., Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat (iv) Case Crime No.20 of 2024, Under Section 380,457,411 I.P.C., Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat (v) Case Crime No.22 of 2024, Under Section 380, 457 I.P.C., Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat (vi) Case Crime No.23 of 2024, Under Section 307 I.P.C. & section 4/25 Arms Act, Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat and (vii) Case Crime No.841 of 2024, Under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act 1986, Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant states that he has a criminal history of ten cases, out of which four cases have been shown in the gang chart. In seven criminal cases including the case under 2 NA528 No. 47675 of 2025 the Gangster Act, he has been bailed out, however, in every case, the concerned Courts have asked for separate sureties, which would result in the applicant providing 14 sureties for 7 cases. Most of the cases, he submits, are of similar nature. He relies upon the decision of this Court in Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.15989 of 2022, whereby the applicant therein was allowed to furnish the same sureties for all the cases. The order of this Court dated 28.06.2022 passed in Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.15989 of 2022 is being reproduced herein below:- "Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record. This petition has been filed invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash the order dated 09.05.2022, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra in Misc. Application in Case Crime No.256 of 2021 under section 379, 34 IPC, Police Station Kamla Nagar, District Agra and also direct release of the applicant from jail on furnishing personal bond and sureties so executed which may hold good for all 23 cases in which the applicant is implicated. Facts, as are not in dispute, are that the applicant was initially implicated in a case of theft being Case Crime No.341 of 2021 and after his arrest in the above case he has applied for bail which has been granted by the court below. It is alleged that subsequent in point of time the applicant has been implicated in 22 other cases of similar nature in the same district, details whereof are given in para 6 of the affidavit filed in support of the present application. Although bail orders are stated to have been passed in all cases but since the applicant has not been able to furnish 46 sureties, he has yet not been released from jail. Counsel for the applicant states that the applicant has been enlarged on bail in all these 23 cases, but the routine direction is to furnish two sureties each in all 23 matters. It is submitted that the applicant is a poor person and has no means to arrange for 46 sureties and that is why he has continued to remain incarcerated in jail notwithstanding grant of bail by the competent court in all matters. Reliance is placed upon an order passed by the Supreme Court in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 8914-8915/2018, which reads as under:- "Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner is said to have been involved in 31 criminal cases for 3 NA528 No. 47675 of 2025 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." Be that as it may, it is not in dispute that the applicant is implicated in 23 different cases instituted against him in the different police stations of District Agra under the offences of theft. This Court finds substance in the applicant's contention that arranging for separate sureties in respect of 23 cases would be difficult particularly as the offences though distinct but are similar in nature. In the facts of the case, this application therefore stands disposed off with 4 NA528 No. 47675 of 2025 the direction that the applicant shall be released on bail in all 23 cases instituted under the offences of theft, as per the description given in para 6 of the affidavit filed in support the present application, upon the applicant furnishing personal bond of Rs.1 lac and the same bond shall hold good for all 23 cases. There shall be two sureties who shall execute the bond of the aforesaid amount and the same shall hold good for all 23 cases. Order impugned dated 09.05.2022 is modified to the above extent."
4. Taking into account the above-mentioned decision and the submissions of the Learned counsel for the applicant, this application is disposed off with the direction that the applicant shall be released on bail in all seven cases instituted under the offences of theft, as per the description given in para-2 of the affidavit filed in support of the present application, upon the applicant furnishing personal bond of Rs.1 lac and the same bond shall hold good for all seven cases. There shall be two sureties who shall execute the bond of the aforesaid amount and the same shall hold good for all seven cases. December 1, 2025 Saif (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The instant application under section 528 BNSS has been preferred to direct the concerned Magistrate to release the applicant on bail only on two sureties in regard to all the seven cases, i.e., (i) Case Crime No.1179/2022, Under Section 380 I.P.C., Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat (ii) Case Crime No.812/2023, Under Section 380 I.P.C., Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat (iii) Case Crime No.886 of 2023, Under Section 380 I.P.C., Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat (iv) Case Crime No.20 of 2024, Under Section 380,457,411 I.P.C., Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat (v) Case Crime No.22 of 2024, Under Section 380, 457 I.P.C., Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat (vi) Case Crime No.23 of 2024, Under Section 307 I.P.C. & section 4/25 Arms Act, Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat and (vii) Case Crime No.841 of 2024, Under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act 1986, Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant states that he has a criminal history of ten cases, out of which four cases have been shown in the gang chart. In seven criminal cases including the case under 2 NA528 No. 47675 of 2025 the Gangster Act, he has been bailed out, however, in every case, the concerned Courts have asked for separate sureties, which would result in the applicant providing 14 sureties for 7 cases. Most of the cases, he submits, are of similar nature. He relies upon the decision of this Court in Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.15989 of 2022, whereby the applicant therein was allowed to furnish the same sureties for all the cases. The order of this Court dated 28.06.2022 passed in Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.15989 of 2022 is being reproduced herein below:- "Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record. This petition has been filed invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash the order dated 09.05.2022, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra in Misc. Application in Case Crime No.256 of 2021 under section 379, 34 IPC, Police Station Kamla Nagar, District Agra and also direct release of the applicant from jail on furnishing personal bond and sureties so executed which may hold good for all 23 cases in which the applicant is implicated. Facts, as are not in dispute, are that the applicant was initially implicated in a case of theft being Case Crime No.341 of 2021 and after his arrest in the above case he has applied for bail which has been granted by the court below. It is alleged that subsequent in point of time the applicant has been implicated in 22 other cases of similar nature in the same district, details whereof are given in para 6 of the affidavit filed in support of the present application. Although bail orders are stated to have been passed in all cases but since the applicant has not been able to furnish 46 sureties, he has yet not been released from jail. Counsel for the applicant states that the applicant has been enlarged on bail in all these 23 cases, but the routine direction is to furnish two sureties each in all 23 matters. It is submitted that the applicant is a poor person and has no means to arrange for 46 sureties and that is why he has continued to remain incarcerated in jail notwithstanding grant of bail by the competent court in all matters. Reliance is placed upon an order passed by the Supreme Court in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 8914-8915/2018, which reads as under:- "Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner is said to have been involved in 31 criminal cases for 3 NA528 No. 47675 of 2025 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." Be that as it may, it is not in dispute that the applicant is implicated in 23 different cases instituted against him in the different police stations of District Agra under the offences of theft. This Court finds substance in the applicant's contention that arranging for separate sureties in respect of 23 cases would be difficult particularly as the offences though distinct but are similar in nature. In the facts of the case, this application therefore stands disposed off with 4 NA528 No. 47675 of 2025 the direction that the applicant shall be released on bail in all 23 cases instituted under the offences of theft, as per the description given in para 6 of the affidavit filed in support the present application, upon the applicant furnishing personal bond of Rs.1 lac and the same bond shall hold good for all 23 cases. There shall be two sureties who shall execute the bond of the aforesaid amount and the same shall hold good for all 23 cases. Order impugned dated 09.05.2022 is modified to the above extent."
4. Taking into account the above-mentioned decision and the submissions of the Learned counsel for the applicant, this application is disposed off with the direction that the applicant shall be released on bail in all seven cases instituted under the offences of theft, as per the description given in para-2 of the affidavit filed in support of the present application, upon the applicant furnishing personal bond of Rs.1 lac and the same bond shall hold good for all seven cases. There shall be two sureties who shall execute the bond of the aforesaid amount and the same shall hold good for all seven cases. December 1, 2025 Saif (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)