Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 10093 of 2025 Applicant :- Omprakash Jangid Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Vijay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri S.K. Singh, learned AGA for the State. 2. This is an application U/s 528 BNSS has been filed for a direction to the court below to accept only one personal bond and two sureties for all the following cses lodged against the applicant: I. Case No.355 of 2022 (Computer No.4899 of 2020): Anand Vs. Dubai Dry, under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument (N.I.) Act, Police Hapur. Station Hapur Nagar, District II. Complaint Case No.336 of 2022 (Anand International and others Vs. Dubai Dry Fruits and Spice Hub and others), under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument (N.I.) Act, Police Station Hapur Kotwali, District Hapur. Complaint Case No.227 of 2024 (Anand International Vs. Dubai Dry Fruits), under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument (N.I.) Act, Police Station Hapur Nagar, District Hapur. IV. Complaint Case No.228 of 2024 (Anand International Vs. Dubai Dry Fruits), under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument (N.I.) Act, Police Station Hapur Nagar, District Hapur. V. Complaint Case No.230 of 2024 (Anand International Vs. Dubai Dry Fruits), under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument (N.I.) Act, Police Station Hapur Nagar, District Hapur. VI. Complaint Case No.231 of 2024 (Anand International Vs. Dubai Dry Fruits), under section Instrument 138 of Negotiable (N.I.) Act, Police Station Hapur Nagar, District Hapur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that as many as six criminal cases had been inflicted upon the applicant being complaint case nos. 355 of 2022, 336 of 2022, 227 of 2024, 228 of 2024, 230 of 2024 and complaint case no.231 of 2024 in which the applicant has been enlarged on bail by the court below on 07.02.2023, 14.02.2023, 28.02.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 31.01.2021. He submits that applicant is not in a position to submit separate sureties and personal bonds and according to him only the sureties and personal bonds in on case be treated for all other cases. He seeks to rely upon in the case of Hani Nishad alias Mohd. Imran alias Vikky vs. State of U.P. SLP (Crl.) No. 8914 - 8915 of 2018 decided on 29.10.2018. 4. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that as per the assertion made in application with the document so appended thereto, it appears that the application has been enlarged on bail in all the said six cases which have been mentioned hereinabove. Accordingly, the applicant is entitled of the judgment in the case of Hani Nishad (Supra). 5. In view of the above, the application is disposed of and it is provided that the applicant shall furnish a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and the same personal bond shall hold together for all six cases. There shall be two sureties who shall execute the bond of Rs. 25000/- which bond shall good for all cases. It is clarified that the personal so executed by the applicant and the bond so executed by two sureties shall hold good for all the six cases. If this is done, the personal bond and two sureties may be treated to be valid in all other cases wherein he has been released on bail and the same shall be deemed to the adequate compliance. Order Date :- 28.4.2025 C. MANI (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- CHANDRAMANI VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad