Allahabad High Court
Salman vs State Of U.P. on 4 August, 2023
Author: Prakash Padia
Bench: Prakash Padia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:157209 Court No. - 4 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28299 of 2023 Applicant :- Salman Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mahendra Kumar Yadav,Vinod Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the records.
2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed inter-alia with the prayer to direct the court below to accept one bail bond and sureties in all five cases pending against the applicant bearing (1) Case Crime No.505 of 2022, under Section 307, 411, 413, 414, 420, 34 IPC and Section 41/102 IPC Police Station Kurawali, District Mainpuri (2) Case Crime No. 510 of 2022, under Section-3/25/27 Arms Act, Police Station-Kurawali, Mainpuri (3) Case Crime No. 509 of 2022, under Section-307, 420 I.P.C., Police Station-Kurawali, Mainpuri (4) Case Crime No. 484 of 2021, under Section-307 I.P.C., Police Station-Kurawali, Mainpuri (5) Case Crime No. 514 of 2022, under Section-147, 148, 149, 307 I.P.C., Police Station-Kurawali, Mainpuri.
3. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that identical controversy has already been decided by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgement and order dated 28.02.2023 passed in Application Under Section 482 No.43475 of 2022 (Rizwan and State of U.P.). The order dated 28.02.2023 reads as follows :-
"Heard Mr. Sanjay Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the applicant seeking a direction upon the court below to accept one bail bond and sureties in all the six criminal cases pending against the applicant being Case Crime No.293/2022, 370/2022, 366/2022, 350/2022, 359/2022, 475/2022 passed by learned Session Judge, Mainpuri.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is involved in six criminal cases for various offences. The bail has been granted in all the six cases but the applicant is unable to manage the separate surety bonds, hence, he could not submit his bail bonds in all the six cases. Therefore, he has requested that the learned court below concerned be directed to consider the sureties and personal bond in one case treating the same for all the six cases.
Learned counsel for the applicant has indicated the details of the aforesaid six cases in the memo of application as under:-
(1) Case Crime No.293 of 2022, under Section-380 I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali, District-Mainpuri; (2) Case Crime No.366 of 2022, under Section-307 I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali, District-Mainpuri; (3) Case Crime No.370 of 2022, under Section-3/25 Arms Act, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Mainpuri; (4) Case Crime No.350 of 2022, under Section-380 I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali, District-Mainpuri; (5) Case Crime No.359 of 2022, under Section-459 I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali, District-Mainpuri; (6) Case Crime No.475 of 2022, under Section- 2/3 of UP Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention ) Act, 1986, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Mainpuri;
Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky vs. The State of U.P. vide order dated 29th October, 2018 passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No(s). 8914-8915 of 2018, wherein it has been directed that the learned court below to accept the sureties and personal bond in one case and treat the same for all other cases, which is quoted herein below:
"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."
Learned Additional Government Advocate has not disputed the aforesaid legal position being settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
In view of facts and circumstances of the case, the application is disposed of and it is provided that the applicant shall execute a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned below which bond shall hold good for all the six cases. It is clarified that the personal bond so executed by the applicant and the bond so executed by the two sureties shall hold good for all six cases. If this is done, the said personal bond and two sureties may be treated to be valid in all other cases wherein applicant has been released on bail and the same shall be deemed to be adequate compliance of all other bail orders."
4. Since the controversy involved in the present case is identical as in the case of Rizwan hence applicant is also entitled for the same relief.
5. In view of facts and circumstances of the case, the application is disposed of and it is provided that the applicant shall execute a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned below which bond shall hold good for all the five cases namely (1) Case Crime No.505 of 2022, under Section 307, 411, 413, 414, 420, 34 IPC and Section 41/102 IPC Police Station Kurawali, District Mainpuri (2) Case Crime No. 510 of 2022, under Section-3/25/27 Arms Act, Police Station-Kurawali, Mainpuri (3) Case Crime No. 509 of 2022, under Section-307, 420 I.P.C., Police Station-Kurawali, Mainpuri (4) Case Crime No. 484 of 2021, under Section-307 I.P.C., Police Station-Kurawali, Mainpuri (5) Case Crime No. 514 of 2022, under Section-147, 148, 149, 307 I.P.C., Police Station-Kurawali, Mainpuri. It is clarified that the personal bond so executed by the applicant and the bond so executed by the two sureties shall hold good for all five cases. If this is done, the said personal bond and two sureties may be treated to be valid in all other cases wherein applicant has been released on bail and the same shall be deemed to be adequate compliance of all other bail orders.
Order Date :- 4.8.2023 Pramod Tripathi