The discretion of the court to permit accused involved in multiple cases to provide sureties in one or more cases, which will be held valid in the remaining cases, based on the facts and circumstances of the case.

JUDGMENT :

ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Arvind Kumar Tripathi, learned AGA for the State.

2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to direct the learned court below to take one personal bond and only two sureties from the petitioner in all 7 cases mentioned below:

“1. Case Crime No. 196 of 2023, u/s 392, 411 IPC, Police Station Vikas Nagar, District Lucknow, Bail granted on and surety amount 23.11.2023, two sureties of Rs. 1,00,000/-

2. Case Crime No. 197 of 2023, u/s 392, 411 IPC, Police Station Vikas Nagar, District Lucknow, Bail granted on and surety amount 23.11.2023, two sureties of Rs. 1,00,000/-

3. Case Crime No. 198 of 2023, u/s 392, 411 IPC, Police Station Chowk, District Lucknow, Bail granted on and surety amount 03.01.2024, two sureties of Rs. 1,00,000/-

4. Case Crime No. 205 of 2023, u/s 392, 411 IPC, Police Station P.G.I. District Lucknow, Bail granted on and surety amount 24.11.2023, two sureties of Rs. 1,00,000/-

5. Case Crime No. 31 of 2023, u/s 392, 411 IPC, Police Station Hasanganj, District Lucknow, Bail granted on and surety amount 03.01.2024, two sureties of Rs. 1,00,000/-

6. Case Crime No. 253 of 2023, u/s 392, 411 IPC, Police Station Aliganj, District-Lucknow, Bail granted on and surety amount 03.01.2024, two sureties of Rs. 1,00,000/-

7. Case Crime No. 133 of 2023, u/s 394 IPC, Police Station Aliganj, District Lucknow, Bail granted on and surety amount 03.01.2024, two sureties of Rs. 1,00,000/- in which the petitioner has been granted bail by the learned courts below, which this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to fix in the interest of justice.”

3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant was falsely implicated in seven cases though he was not named in six cases but on his arrest in Case Crime No. 197 of 2023, Police Station-Vikas Nagar, District-Lucknow, other cases were also planted on him and further submits that though the bail has been granted to the applicant in all the seven cases but he could not be released from jail because of his poor financial condition, he is unable to provide separate sureties in all seven cases. Therefore, he may be permitted to furnish sureties in one case which may be deemed to be valid in other six cases in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Hani Nishad vs. State of U.P. 2018 AIR Online SC 1576 direction may be issued that sureties in one case be held good in other remaining six cases.

4. Learned AGA has pointed out that in Hani Nishad's case (supra), this court has not laid down any law for universal application of its observations but that was passed on the basis of special circumstances of that case.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances and on perusal of judgment of the Apex Court in Hani Nishad's case (supra), it is clear that the Apex Court did not lay down any law to permit the accused involved in number of cases to provide sureties only in one case to release him in other cases also. Paragraph Nos. 7 and 8 of the aforesaid judgment are being quoted as below:

“7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even though the court has granted bail to the petitioner, the petitioner is unable to execute the bail bonds because of the onerous conditions of bail imposed particularly the condition of producing 31 sureties.

8. Considering the submissions, the impugned order is modified to the extent that the petitioner shall execute a personal bond for Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand only) and the same bond shall hold good for all 31 cases. There shall be two sureties who shall execute the bond for Rs. 30,000/- which bond shall hold good for all the 31 cases. It is clarified that the personal bond so executed by the petitioner and the bond so executed by the two sureties shall hold good for all the 31 cases.”

6. Therefore, in absence of any law, it is discretion of court on considering facts and circumstances of case including the nature of cases to permit the accuse