FIROZversusSTATE OF U.P.

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                 APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 36108 of 2026

Firoz
                                                             .....Applicant(s)
                                    Versus

State of U.P.
                                                                 .....Opposite
                                                                       Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Madhukar Maurya, Mohd Zubair Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 75
                 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the
State.

2. The present application has been filed to direct the Trial Court/Court
concerned to consider and accept the personal bond and two sureties in
one criminal case treating the same for all the eight (8) criminal cases
mentioned in the paragraph no.8 of the affidavit filed in support of of the
instant application.

3. Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is unable to
arrange eight (8) sureties. Consequently, in spite of the fact that applicant
has already been released on bail in all eight (8) criminal cases pending
against him, the applicant has yet not been released from jail, as applicant
has failed to furnish separate surety bonds in all the cases. In the facts and
circumstances of the case, it is thus urged that applicant be directed to
furnish a common personal bond and common surety bonds of like
amount in all the cases. He therefore contends that appropriate direction
be issued to the concerned trial Court.

4. Record shows that applicant has been enlarged on bail in different case
crime number by the concerned Court vide following orders:-

i. Case Crime No.237 of 2025, u/s 303 (2) of B.N.S., Police Station-
Titawi, District- Muzzafarnagar.
                                                     NA528 No. 36108 of 2026
                              2


ii. Case Crime No.244 of 2025, u/s 303 (2) of B.N.S., Police Station-
Titawi, District- Muzzafarnagar.

iii. Case Crime No.96 of 2025, u/s 109 (1) of B.N.S., Police Station,
Bhaurakalan, District- Muzzafarnagar.

iv. Case Crime No.87 of 2025, u/s 305A and 331 (4) of B.N.S., Police
Station-Bhaurakalan, District- Muzzafarnagar.

v. Case Crime No.277 of 2025, u/s 305 and 331 (4) of B.N.S., Police
Station-Shahpur, District- Muzzafarnagar.

vi. Case Crime No.1102 of 2012, u/s 379 and 411 of IPC, Police Station-
Kotwali Nagar, District- Muzzafarnagar.

vii. Case Crime No.245 of 2012, u/s 392, 411 and 120B of IPC, Police
Station-Kotwali Nagar, District-Muzzafarnagar.

viii. Case Crime No.282 of 2025, u/s 109(1) of B.N.S. and 3,25 and 28 of
The Arms Act, 1959, Police Station-Shahpur, District- Muzzafarnagar.

5. He has then referred to Sections- 483, 484, 485, 486, 487, 488, 489,
490 of B.N.S.S. (hereinafter to be referred as BNSS) and on basis thereof
contents that under the scheme of BNSS (hereinafter referred to as "the
BNSS") there is no mandatory requirement of furnishing separate
personal bonds as well as surety bonds for seeking enlargement on bail in
different case crime numbers.

6. On the aforesaid factual and legal premise, learned counsel for
applicant contends that such conditions which commensurate with the
facts and circumstances of present case, are liable to be imposed, so that
applicant who has been granted bail in all cases pending against him is
ultimately bailed out.

7. Reference has also been made to the orders passed by Supreme Court
dated 29.10.2018 in Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky Vs.
State of U.P. and 09.08.2021 in Ramwati Awasthi & Others Vs. State of
U.P. and Others. He has also referred to orders passed by this Court dated
15.03.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.11380 of 2019,
                                                                                          NA528 No. 36108 of 2026
                                                                   3


                                    (Rizwan alias Atta Vs. State of U.P.), reported in 2019 (107) ACC 894
                                    and 21.11.2019 in Criminal Misc. Application (under Section 482
                                    Cr.P.C.) No.40957 of 2019, (Mobin Vs. State of U.P.), wherein Court has
                                    been modified the conditions of bail by providing that the personal bond
                                    and two sureties furnished by applicant, be accepted in all the cases
                                    pending against applicant. Photocopies of above orders have been
                                    supplied by learned counsel for applicant which are taken on record.

                                    8. On the aforesaid factual and legal premise, it is urged that present
                                    application be allowed and two sureties furnished by applicant in one case
                                    crime number be accepted as sureties in all the cases.

                                    9. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed this application, but could not
                                    dispute the orders relied upon by learned counsel for applicant.

                                    10. In view of above, present application succeeds and is liable to be
                                    allowed.

                                    11. It is accordingly, provided that application shall be allowed to execute
                                    one personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned
                                    which shall hold in all four cases pending against present applicant.



                                                                                 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)
                                    September 8, 2026
                                    CP.sahani




Digitally signed by :-
CHANDRA PRAKASH SAHANI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad