RAJESH PANDEY v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME SECTT. LKO
A482/5239/2025 · 2025-07-02
Subhash Vidyarthi
Special Leave Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 147646 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 147646 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37253 Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5239 of 2025 Applicant :- Rajesh Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Suresh Kumar Yadav,Poonam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. Heard Sri Suresh Kumar Yadav, the learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Mayank Sinha, the learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record. 2. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to allow the applicant to submit personal bonds and two sureties in one case which should be sufficient in 4 cases in which the applicant has been granted bail. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in 4 criminal cases and has been granted bail by the learned High Court/courts below, the details of cases are as under :- (i) Case Crime No. 16 of 2017, under Sections 392, 411, 413 IPC, Police Station GRP, District Barabanki. (ii) Case Crime No. 27 of 2017, under Section 356, 379, 411, 413 IPC, Police Station GRP, District Barabanki. (iii) Case Crime No. 32 of 2017, under Sections 380, 411, 413 IPC, Police Station GRP, District Barabanki. (iv) Case Crime No. 52 of 2017, under Section 3/25 of Arms Act, Police Station GRP, District Barabanki. 4. The learned A.G.A has opposed the application stating that the applicant has a long criminal history and, therefore, he is not entitled to receive any discretionary relief by this Court. 5. In response to this objection, the learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant be permitted to submit a personal bond and two sureties for two lakh each for
release in all the 4 cases. 6. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that in similar circumstances, namely, in the case of Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh [SLP (Crl.) No.8914-8915/2018) the Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated 29.10.2018 has permitted the applicant to submit personal bonds and two sureties of heavy amount to hold good in all the cases. 7. Considering the aforesaid fact, the petition is disposed of and it is directed that the applicant shall furnish a personal bond and two sureties of Rs.
50,000/- each and at least one of the two sureties will be a local surety which shall be treated to be valid in all the 4 cases wherein the bail orders have been passed. . (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Order Date :- 2.7.2025 -Amit K- Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench