Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 159199 (ALL)

SHADAB ALIAS FAKKADI v. THE STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT.OF HOME LKO.

NA528/1035/2025 · 2025-08-25

Shree Prakash Singh

Special Leave Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:49717 Court No. - 14 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 1035 of 2025 Applicant :- Shadab Alias Fakkadi Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt.Of Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Shishir Srivastava,Brijendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 2. By means of the instant application, the applicant has prayed that this Court may be pleased to direct the learned trial Court not to insist the applicant to file separate sureties and bonds in each and every three cases and accept only two sureties and one personal bond in lieu of all the three 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 three cases arising out of following Case Crime Numbers : 1) Case Crime No.094/2025 lodged at Police Station Aliganj District Lucknow; 2) Case Crime No.164/2025 lodged at Police Station Mall District Lucknow; and 3) Case Crime No.117/2025 lodged at Police Station Mall District Lucknow; 4. He next added that despite the applicant has been granted bail in the aforesaid cases, he is still in jail.Being poo 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 petitioners 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 judgment passed in Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky (supra). 6. Considering the aforesaid fact, the petition is disposed of 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. [Shree Prakash Singh, J.] Order Date :- 25.8.2025 MVS/- Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench