Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 93543 (ALL)

KAUSAL ALI @ TUTTAL @ SAJAN v. STATE OF U.P.

NA528/35536/2025 · 2025-09-22

Yogesh Dubey Joint Registrar Judicial

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 35536 of 2025 Court No. - 89 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Shri Ankit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Seema Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated by the concerned police in 4 cases. It has further been submitted that in all the cases bail application has been allowed by this Court/ court below but due to his poverty and financial crisis he is not able to manage separate sureties in all the cases. It has further been submitted that the applicant may be allowed to be released on bail only on two sureties in regard to all the cases. 3. Learned counsel further submitted that the applicant has been enlarged on bail in the following cases: 1. Case Crime No. 220 of 2025 Under sections 304(2), 317(2) B.N.S., Police Station G.R.P., District Kanpur Nagar. 2. Case Crime No. 20 of 2025, Under sections 305(C), 317(2) B.N.S., Police Station G.R.P., , District Kanpur Nagar. 3. Case Crime No. 145 of 2025, Under sections 305(C), 317(2) B.N.S., Police Station G.R.P., District Kanpur Nagar. 4. Case Crime No. 185 of 2025, Under sections 305(C), 317(2) of B.N.S., Police Station G.R.P., District Kanpur Nagar. 4. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed and submitted that all the offences against the applicant are pending in different courts and hence prayer of the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ankit Kumar Singh, Mohamad Maszood Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Kausal Ali @ Tuttal @ Sajan .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) applicant cannot be allowed. 5. Keeping in view the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant as well as the factual argument and the judgment and order dated 29.10.2018 of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh passed in Petition (s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 8914-8915/2018, this Court is of the view that ends of justice would be met in case applicant is directed to submit fresh two sureties and a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- to the satisfaction of the Court concerned in one case and the same shall be considered by the Court concerned as sureties and bonds in other case(s) for the purpose of releasing the applicant on bail. 6. It is ordered accordingly. 7. With the aforesaid observations, the instant application U/s 528 BNSS is accordingly disposed of. September 23, 2025 RKM NA528 No. 35536 of 2025 2 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad