HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1255 of 2026 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE ABDUL SHAHID, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionists and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present criminal revision has been filed against the order dated 22.01.2026 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Etawah, in S.T. No. 308 of 2012, State v. Abhayram and others, Police Station Pachhon Gaon, District Etawah. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionists has submitted that the revisionists had filed an application seeking exemption from the surety bonds furnished by them on behalf of the accused persons. They no longer wish to continue as sureties for accused Abhayram. It is further submitted that accused Abhayram has been released on bail vide order dated 15.10.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 5208 of 2023 (Abhayram v. State of U.P.), under Sections 147, 302, 149, 120-B, and 201 I.P.C. 4. Learned A.G.A. has submitted that the revisionists stood sureties on their own volition. There was no direction by any court compelling them to furnish sureties for a convicted person under Section 302 I.P.C. who has been released on bail during the pendency of the criminal appeal. If such sureties are discharged without compliance of the legal requirements, the very purpose of taking surety would be frustrated, and it would become difficult to ensure the presence of the accused during the proceedings. 5. The learned trial court has recorded a specific finding that the accused was released on bail on 15.10.2025 by the High Court during the pendency of the appeal, subject to furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,50,000/- and two Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Raghuraj Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ramsewak And Another .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) sureties of the like amount. The revisionists furnished the sureties voluntarily in compliance with the said order. The criminal appeal is still pending before the High Court. 6. The sureties moved an application seeking to be exonerated from their surety bonds; however, they have not surrendered the accused Abhayram. Unless the accused is surrendered or produced before the court by the sureties, it would not be feasible to discharge them from their liability. The revisionists voluntarily stood sureties for a convicted person under Section 302 I.P.C. It is the duty and obligation of the sureties/revisionists to produce the accused before the court if they seek to be discharged from their surety bonds. Otherwise, it would place an undue burden upon the court and may seriously affect the criminal proceedings. 7. There is neither any illegality nor any irregularity in the impugned order. 8. The criminal revision is liable to be dismissed and is, accordingly, dismissed. February 26, 2026 K.K. Maurya CRLR No. 1255 of 2026 2 (Abdul Shahid,J.) Digitally signed by :- KAMLESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad