HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 1017 of 2025 Court No. - 14 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 2. By means of the instant applicant, the applicant has prayed that this Court may be pleased to direct the learned Court below not to insist the petitioner to file separate sureties and bonds in each and every six cases and accept only two sureties and one personal bond in lieu of all six cases. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that it has become impossible for the applicant to submit separate sureties and bonds in each of cases, in which, he has been granted bail. He added that the applicant has been granted bail in six cases arising out of following Case Crime Numbers :- 1) Case Crime No. 0057 of 2025, under Sections 303(2) and 317(2) B.N.S. PS - Jankipuram District - Lucknow. 2) Case Crime No. 0096 of 2025, under Sections 317(2) and 303(2) B.N.S. PS - Dubagga District - Lucknow. 3) Case Crime No. 0103 of 2025, under Sections 317(2), 303(2) and 3(5) B.N.S. PS- Mahanagar District - Lucknow. 4) Case Crime No. 0165 of 2025, under Sections 317(2) and 303(2) B.N.S. PS - Gudamba District - Lucknow. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Pandey, Janhvy Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mohd. Imtiyaz .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Home Affairs Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) 5) Case Crime No. 0243 of 2025, under Sections 317(2) and 303(2) B.N.S. PS - Madiyanv District - Lucknow. 6) Case Crime No. 0246 of 2025, under Sections 317(2) and 317(4) B.N.S. PS - Madiyanv District - Lucknow. 4. He next added that despite the Trial Court granted the bail in aforesaid matters, the applicant is still in jail. Being poor person, he is unable to produce the sureties in each cases. It is further submitted by the 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 Supreme Court vide order dated 29.10.2018 has permitted the petitioner to submit separate personal bonds and two sureties of heavy amount to hold good in all the cases. 5. Referring the aforesaid judgement and order, he submits that the applicant may also be given the benefit of the ratio of the judgement passed in Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky (supra). 6. Considering the aforesaid fact, the petition is disposed off with a direction to the applicant to furnish a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of the like amount in one case, which shall be treated to be valid in all other cases wherein the bail orders have been passed. August 26, 2025 Mayank NA528 No. 1017 of 2025 2 (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench