Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:118987 Court No. - 77 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 25780 of 2025 Applicant :- Gulfam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Goyal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Present application has been preferred with prayer to modify the conditions of bail orders to the extent that two sureties for each cases and release the applicant in Case Crime nos. 16 of 2013, 99A of 2007, 99B of 2007 07 of 2013, 37 of 2014, 521 of 2024, 522 of 2024, 387 of 2020 in which applicant has been released on bail and modify the bail orders passed in above case crime to the extent that two common sureties which has been arranged by the applicant shall hold good in all the aforesaid cases. 3. At the very outset, learned counsel for applicant sought the direction of this Court in shape of instructing the trial court to permit two sureties for all eight cases wherein, applicant has already been enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant application. 5. During the course of argument a precise query has been raised before learned counsel for applicant that whether applicant has ever preferred the bail bond in pursuance to the aforesaid cases wherein he has been enlarged on bail and if so, whether there is a specific denial from learned trial court in shape of asking separate sureties for separate cases. In response to the query, learned counsel for applicant fairly submitted that applicant never preferred any bail bond in pursuance to any of aforesaid cases in which he has been enlarged on bail and there is no specific denial from learned trial court concerned. 6. In view of aforementioned discussions and after perusing the records, this Court finds that no prejudice has been caused to the applicant as applicant never intended to prefer bail bonds in pursuance to first bail order dated 28.11.2024 passed in Case Crime no. 16 of 2013, although thereafter till 23.05.2025 applicant has already been extended bail in consecutive 8 cases but at no point of time he intended to prefer bail bonds and as such there is hardly any denial available in record with regard to two surety in each and ever bail bond. Hence, no cause of action arises in favour of applicant to pursue the instant application. 7. The instant application stands dismissed at this stage accordingly. However, applicant is at liberty to prefer appropriate application for consideration of same surety before the highest forum of the District Judgeship, Agra/ learned court of Additional District Judge, Agra/ learned court of Sessions Judge, Agra from where the bail has been considered and extended in favour of applicant. Order Date :- 22.7.2025 Shaswat Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad