Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.23 seconds)
Gopal Krishna @ Gulshan vs State Of U.P. on 22 February, 2023 cites

Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 29 October, 2018

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is involved in five criminal cases. Bail has been granted to him in all the cases by the concerned court. 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 5 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 Crl. Misc.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 1 - Cited by 479 - Full Document

Shiv Shankar Goutam vs State Of U.P. on 7 December, 2022

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is involved in five criminal cases. Bail has been granted to him in all the cases by the concerned court. 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 5 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 Crl. Misc.
Allahabad High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 22 - S Ahmed - Full Document

Sunil Pathak And 7 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 5 March, 2020

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is involved in five criminal cases. Bail has been granted to him in all the cases by the concerned court. 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 5 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 Crl. Misc.
Allahabad High Court Cites 29 - Cited by 22 - R Chaturvedi - Full Document

Jitendra @ Jeetu Gupta vs State Of U.P. on 25 April, 2022

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is involved in five criminal cases. Bail has been granted to him in all the cases by the concerned court. 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 5 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 Crl. Misc.
Allahabad High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 22 - S Lavania - Full Document

Pushpensra Chaudhary @ Kalu vs State Of U.P. And Another on 9 January, 2023

Application 482 No. 364 of 2023 (Pushpendra Chaudhary @ Kalu Vs. State of U.P. and another) passed by this Court vide order dated 09.01.2023 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.
Allahabad High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 17 - S Gopal - Full Document
1