Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 194887 (ALL)

RAM LAKHAN SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF HOME, LUCKNOW AND ANOTHER

CRLA/2316/2022 · 2025-10-15

Pramod Kumar Srivastava

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2316 of 2022 Court No. - 28 HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. 2. None has appeared on behalf of the opposite party No.2. 3. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 02.07.2022 passed by Special Judge SC/ST Act, District Gonda in Misc. Criminal Case No. 249 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 321/2016, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 I.P.C. and Section 3(2) (v) SC/ST Act, Police Station Katra Bazar, District Gonda. 4. Learned counsel for appellant submits that the opposite party No.2 has lodged an F.I.R. against the accused Nanhey Singh, which was registered as Misc. Criminal Case No. 249 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 321/2016, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 I.P.C. and Section 3(2) (v) SC/ST Act, Police Station Katra Bazar, District Gonda. The accused Nanhey Singh was granted bail by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 27.10.2021 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 866 of 2021. 5. Learned counsel for appellant submits that the appellant has taken sureties of accused Nanhey Singh and due to non-fulfillment of the condition imposed while granting bail by this Hon'ble Court to the accused Nanhey Singh, vide order dated 27.04.2022, the sureties was forfeited and recovery warrant was issued against the appellant. On 12.05.2022 the appellant could not produce the accused before the trial court and sought time and vide order dated 12.05.2022 the appellant was directed to deposit the amount of Rs. 2,00,000/-. On 12.05.2022 the appellant was sent to jail and after depositing amount of Rs.2,00,000/- he was released on bail vide order dated 16.05.2022. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the appellant had filed an application on 02.07.2022 to release his deposited amount in his favour, but the same was also dismissed vide impugned order dated 02.07.2022. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Vijay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Ram Lakhan Singh .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home, Lucknow And Another .....Respondent(s) 7. Learned counsel for appellant has further submitted that the appellant was surety of accused Nanhey Singh and on 28.05.2022 the accused Nanhey Singh appeared before the court and had also filed an application and two sureties and also deposited the amount of Rr. 100000/- as directed by this Hon'ble Court. 8. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant and submits that the appellant has taken the sureity of the accused Nanhey Singh and when the accused absconded, the notice was issued to the appellant, but he also did not turn up and then the recovery warrant was issued by the trial court and in compliance thereof Rs. 2,00,000/- has been deposited by the appellant. He further submits that after passing of the order dated 12.05.2022, on 28.05.2022 the accused Nanhey Singh appeared before the court and had two sureties and also deposited the amount of Rs. 100000/-. It was the duty of the surety to ensure that accused was appearing in the Court on each and every date. Sureties have failed to ensure it because accused did not appear in Court, h ence the court below had no option but to pass the impugned order. 9.At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant further submits that one more opportunity be given to the appellant to file new application to release his deposited amount in his favour before the trial Court. 10.After considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the present appeal is disposed of with a direction that if the appellant files an application for release of the amount deposited, the same shall be decided in accordance with law without being influenced by any observation(s) made in this order. October 15, 2025 Arvind CRLA No. 2316 of 2022 2 (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARVIND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench