Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:80142 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 10179 of 2025 (Leading) Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Chaudhary Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Pal Singh,Rajat Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. :With: Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 13923 of 2025 (Connected) Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Chaudhary Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Pal Singh,Rajat Kumar Shukla Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Rajat Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants in both the applications and the learned A.G.A. 2. The facts of the leading application are that on 30.01.2020, an agreement was entered into between applicant and O.P. No.2 with respect to Khasra No.1882, 1883, according to which it was decided that the plot was to be developed and then disposed of. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per the terms and condition of the agreement, certain cheques stood issued and the owners of the land being O.P. No.2 was to provide possession of the land for being developed, in lieu thereof, several cheques were drawn by the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the owner of the land including the O.P. No.2 committed default in adhering to the terms and condition of the agreement, pursuant whereto applicant had no option but to direct the Bank for stopping of the payment pursuant whereto the cheques were dishonoured. Learned counsel for the applicant has also invited attention towards the notice issued by the applicant to O.P. No.2 on 25.06.2020. 3. Prayer in the present application under Section 528 of BNSS preferred by the applicant is for seeking direction for the court below to direct the court below to trial the following complaint cases jointly Complaint Case No. A. 4419 of 2020, B. 4420 of 2020, C. 9110 of 2020 D. 286 of 2021, E.10 of 2021 new Number 51854 of 2023 (Jahan Singh Vs. Manoj Kumar Chaudhary) under section 138 N.I. Act Police' Station Refinery, District Mathura pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No.12, Mathura. He seeks to rely upon the provisions contained under Section 220 of the CrPC and the judgment in the case of Hani Nishad @ Mohamad Imran @ Vikky Vs. State of U.P. 2018 LawSuit (SC) 1637 so as to contend that the Hon'ble Apex Court had directed to accept one personal bond and the same bond shall hold good for all the other cases. 4. As regards the connected application is concerned, the facts are same. However, the prayer made is that the court below be directed to decide the trial of the following complaint cases jointly, Complaint Case No. 1 A. 4416 of 2020, B. 4417 of 2020, C. 9246 of 2020 D. 288 of 2021 (Funsiya Vs. Manoj Kumar Chaudhary) under section 138 N.I. Act Police Station Refinery, District Mathura pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No.12, Mathura while clubbing the complaint cases with each other and release the applicant in entire following cases in one bail, 5. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that the application is premature, in so far as a direction for granting of bail on same personal bond and surety. He further submits that it is always open for the applicant to prefer proceeding while filing application under Section 220 of CrPC and in case, such an application is preferred, then the Magistrate has power to club the said complaint, and in case, bail orders are passed with separate bonds and sureties, then it is always open for the applicant either to insist before the Court or to approach this Court while filing an Application u/s 528 of BNSS. 6. To such a submission, learned counsel for the applicants have no objection. 7. Considering the submissions so made across the Bar, both the applications stand disposed of granting liberty to the applicant to take appropriate proceedings as per the law. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 N.S.Rathour (Vikas Budhwar, J) Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad