2025:UHC:10204 1 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc Application No. 2024 of 2025 18 November, 2025 Kuldeep Nandrajog --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Sharang Dhulia, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned AGA along with Ms. Sweta Badola Dobhal and Mr. Prabhat Kandpal, learned Brief Holders for the State. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. The present application has been filed under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking a direction to permit the Applicant to furnish common sureties in respect of all 96 cases, as mentioned in the relief clause of the Application, in which bail has already been granted by the court below but the Applicant could not be released since he could not arrange the separate sureties in each of the cases. 2. The brief facts of the case are that multiple FIRs have been lodged against the Applicant at Police Station Bahadrabad, District Haridwar, for offences under Sections 420 and 120-B of the IPC. The total number of cases stands at 96. The Applicant contends that he was working as a Director with M/s Octagon Builders & Promoters Pvt. Ltd. and had no role in the day-to-day affairs thereafter. It is further contended that he has been falsely implicated in these cases, which are similar in nature and pertain to the same transactions. 3. It is submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since long. In several of the said cases, he has been granted bail by the learned courts below. However, his release could not be secured as the orders require him to furnish two separate sureties in each case, which is practically impossible considering the large number of cases. 4. The Applicant applied for bail in all 96 cases, the 2025:UHC:10204 2 reference of which has been given in the relief clause of the application, which are reproduced as below:- S.No. Case Crime/FIR Nos. Sections Police Station in all FIR 1 418 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC Bahadrabad, District Haridwar 2 157 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 3 183 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 4 190 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 5 145 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 6 159 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 7 186 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 8 188 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 9 214 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 10 178 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 11 221 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 12 220 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 13 217 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 14 207 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 15 171 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 16 142 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 17 182 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 18 232 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 19 144 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 20 211 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 21 219 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 22 179 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 23 27 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 24 177 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 25 29 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 26 465 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 27 176 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 28 129 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 29 25 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 30 487 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 31 26 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 32 200 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 33 28 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 34 228 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 35 501 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 36 204 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 37 167 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 38 473 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 39 155 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 40 466 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 41 136 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 42 469 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 43 180 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 44 472 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 45 500 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 46 30 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 47 470 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 48 218 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 49 137 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 2025:UHC:10204 3 50 475 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 51 482 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 52 464 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 53 480 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 54 406 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 55 477 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 56 489 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 57 160 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 58 184 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 59 185 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 60 503 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 61 471 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 62 148 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 63 450 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 64 151 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 65 457 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 66 141 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 67 467 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 68 43 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 69 502 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 70 138 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 71 455 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 72 24 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 73 149 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 74 462 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 75 146 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 76 478 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 77 154 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 78 484 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 79 389 of 2023 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 80 233 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 81 215 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 82 143 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 83 153 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 84 32 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 85 37 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 86 35 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 87 132 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 88 216 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 89 131 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 90 152 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 91 156 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 92 150 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 93 128 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 94 158 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 95 140 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 96 133 of 2024 U/S 420 & 120-B of IPC 2025:UHC:10204 4 5. Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that in similar circumstances, the Coordinate Benches of this Court has granted relief by permitting common sureties in Criminal Misc. Application No. C- 528/226/2024 (order dated 16.08.2024) and Criminal Misc. Application No. C-528/369/2025 (order dated 25.03.2025). 6. Learned counsel for the Applicant further submits that the Applicant produced a Rent Agreement as proof of tenancy. Same is taken on record. 7. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the application on the ground that the satisfaction of sureties lies within the discretion of the trial court, and the informants in the individual cases should also be heard before any blanket relief is granted. He further submits that the Rent Agreement provided by the learned counsel for the Applicant is not a valid ground as the tenancy is changeable. 8. This Court considered the submissions of both sides and perused the record. It is evident that the Applicant is facing multiple prosecutions, all arising out of similar allegations of cheating in the name of providing land/plots. In most of these cases, he has been enlarged on bail, but his continued incarceration is solely due to his inability to furnish separate sureties in each case. 9. The Coordinate Benches of this Court, in previous orders dated 16.08.2024 and 25.03.2025 in the Applicant’s earlier petitions, have granted similar relief, allowing the Applicant to furnish common sureties in multiple cases. The present matter stands on the same footing. 10. This Court is, therefore, confronted with the question as to whether, in such exceptional circumstances, the Applicant may be permitted to furnish a single set of sureties and personal bond to operate across all the FIRs in which bail has already been granted. 11. The provisions of Section 441 of the Code of Criminal Procedure govern the nature and sufficiency of bonds and sureties to be executed upon the grant of bail. The law empowers the Court to determine, in each case, what conditions would reasonably secure the 2025:UHC:10204 5 presence of the accused at trial. 12. In the opinion of this Court, when bail has already been granted in each of the 96 FIRs, and there is no allegation of breach of conditions or flight risk, the continued incarceration of the Applicant solely for want of multiple sureties is neither procedurally necessary nor constitutionally tenable. 13. This Court is also mindful of recent judicial observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in comparable contexts, particularly in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2024 INSC 617), where, in view of multiple prosecutions and the impossibility of furnishing distinct sureties in each case, the Hon’ble Apex Court permitted the accused to execute one personal bond and two common sureties per State, holding such a direction to be legally permissible, proportionate, and consistent with the mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution. 14. It has also been judicially recognised that when the substratum of allegations is common, the imposition of repetitive surety conditions may, in effect, operate as a denial of bail in substance, even where it has been formally granted. 15. In the present case, the multiplicity of FIRs appears to have created a procedural bottleneck, and not one rooted in any substantive apprehension of the Applicant's conduct. 16. In the interest of justice, to prevent undue hardship to the Applicant, and to secure his right to liberty, this Court deems it appropriate to allow this application. 17. The apprehension of abscondence raised by the State can be sufficiently addressed by imposing suitable conditions. 18. In view of the foregoing discussion, the present application is allowed, subject to the following conditions: i. The Applicant, Kuldeep Nandrajog, shall furnish his current permanent address, along with valid proof thereof, to the satisfaction of the learned trial court and the investigating agency. He shall not change his residence without prior intimation to the trial court concerned. ii. The Applicant shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial 2025:UHC:10204 6 court within one week of his release. He shall not apply for the issuance of a fresh passport or any travel documents without prior permission of the trial court concerned. iii. The learned courts below are directed to accept common sureties for the release of the Applicant in all the cases mentioned in the annexed list, wherein he has already been granted bail. iv. The Applicant shall also provide a written undertaking to the effect that: v. He shall remain present before the Investigating Officer and the concerned courts as and when required; vi. He shall not tamper with evidence or threaten or influence any witness; vii. He shall not leave the country without prior leave of the competent court. viii. The Superintendent, District Jail, Haridwar, shall take all necessary steps for the Applicant’s release upon acceptance of the consolidated bond and sureties, unless his custody is required in any other unconnected matter. ix. It is clarified that this direction is being issued as a matter of legal and procedural economy, considering the large number of FIRs arising from similar allegations, and shall not be treated as a precedent in any unrelated proceedings. 19. Let a copy of this order be circulated to the District Judge, Haridwar, and to all concerned Judicial Magistrates and courts for immediate compliance. 20. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 18.11.2025 AK