Allahabad High Court
Irfan @ Chaumin vs State Of U.P. on 28 April, 2023
Author: Samit Gopal
Bench: Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9569 of 2023 Applicant :- Irfan @ Chaumin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
1. List revised.
2. Heard Sri Akhilesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri U.P. Singh, learned counsel for the State.
3. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with following prayers:-
"(i) It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to direct the court below to accept two sureties, which is being submitted by the applicant in respect of the case crime no.227 of 2021, under Sections 379, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Delhi Gate, District Meerut in which the applicant was granted bail vide order dated 24.01.2023 passed by learned court below and the same surety bond be accepted in all 6 other cases relating to Case Crime No.229 of 2021, under Sections 379, 34 I.P.C., Case Crime No.189 of 2022, under Sections 420, 482, 411, 413, 414 I.P.C., Case Crime No.210 of 2021, under Sections 379, 34 I.P.C., Case Crime No.211 of 2021, under Sections 379, 34 I.P.C., Case Crime No.221 of 2021, under Sections 379, 34 I.P.C., all relating to Police Station Delhi Gate, District Meerut, in which the applicant has already released on bail vide order dated 27.01.2023. 27.09.2022, 11.10.2022, 03.10.2022, 28.09.2022, 18.10.2022. 10.01.2023, respectively.
(ii) It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to direct the court below to take a common securities of the applicant is falsely implicated in 7 cases which is quoted as under:-
1. In Case Crime No.227 of 2021, under Sections 379, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Delhi Gate, District Meerut.
2. In Case Crime No.229 of 2021, under Sections 379, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Delhi Gate, District Meerut.
3. In Case Crime No.189 of 2022, under Sections 420, 482, 411, 413, 414 I.P.C., Police Station Delhi Gate, District Meerut.
4. In Case Crime No.211 of 2021, under Sections 379, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Delhi Gate, District Meerut.
5. In Case Crime No.210 of 2021, under Sections 379, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Delhi Gate, District Meerut.
6. In Case Crime No.221 of 2021, under Sections 379, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Delhi Gate, District Meerut.
7. In Case Crime No.220 of 2022, under Section 379 I.P.C., Police Station Delhi Gate, District Meerut.
Which are roped against the applicant, in the interest of justice And / or pass such other and further order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case, otherwise applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury."
4. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is involved in 7 criminal cases of the same nature. Bail has been granted to him in all the cases by the concerned court. An application was moved by him before the C.J.M., Meerut for permitting filing a single bail bond and two sureties which may be treated as sufficient in all the said cases which stood rejected vide order dated 22.12.2022. It is argued that as bail has been granted in all the cases against the applicant, he is unable to file separate bail bonds and surety bonds, hence he may be permitted to file a personal bond and two sureties in one case which may be treated in all the said 7 cases. Learned counsel has relied upon the order passed by the Apex Court in the case of Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky vs. State of U.P.: S.L.P. (Crl) No. 8914-8915/2018 decided on 29.10.2018, order dated 12.05.2021 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in U/S 482/378/407 No. 1974 of 2021 (Shiv Shankar Gautam vs. State of U.P.), the order dated 28.06.2022 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Application U/S 482 No. 15989 of 2022 (Sunil Chak vs. State of U.P. and another) and the order dated 18.07.2022 also passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Application U/S 482 No. 19972 of 2022 (Jitendra Gupta @ Jeetu vs. State of U.P. and another) and has argued that in the said matters the situation was identical and the courts ordered filing a personal bond and two sureties in one case which was directed to be treated to be valid in all the other cases and was directed to be deemed to be an adequate compliance of all the other bail orders for release of the applicant. It is argued that as such appropriate directions to the said effect be passed.
5. Learned counsel for the State has been heard who could not dispute the said proposition and also orders as relied upon by learned counsel for the applicant.
6. After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the records and the facts of the case and orders relied by learned counsel for the applicant, it is provided that the applicant shall be released in all the 7 cases which have been mentioned in paragraph 23 of the affidavit in support of application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1 lakh and two sureties to the like amount (one of the sureties will be of family member of the applicant and the other should be a local person) which shall hold good for all the 7 cases.
7. With the aforesaid direction, the present application stands disposed of.
(Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 28.4.2023 Atul