AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Alok Mahra, J
The present application has been filed under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking a direction to permit the Applicant to furnish common sureties in respect of all 120 cases, as mentioned in the relief clause of the Application, in which bail has already been granted by the court below but the Applicant could not be released since he could not arrange the separate sureties in each of the cases.
The brief facts of the case are that multiple FIRs have been lodged against the Applicant at Police Station Bahadrabad, District Haridwar, for offences under Sections 420, 120-B, 504, 506, 427 & 406 of the IPC. The total number of cases stands at 120. The Applicant contends that he is Director of the company, namely, M/s Octagon Builder and Promoters Private Limited, but he could not complete the project. Multiple F.I.R.s have been lodged against him, which are similar in nature.
It is submitted that the Applicant has been in judicial custody since long. In several of the said cases, he has been granted bail by the learned courts below. However, his release could not be secured as the orders require him to furnish two separate sureties in each case, which is practically impossible considering the large number of cases.
The Applicant applied for bail in all 120 cases, the reference of which has been given in the relief clause of the application, which are reproduced as below:-
S.NO
Case Crime Numbers
Under Sections
Police Station
1
465 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
Bahadrabad, District Haridwar
2
277 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
3
306 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
4
468 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
5
168 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
6
170 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
7
169 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
8
189 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
9
172 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
10
401 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
11
563 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
12
437 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
13
451 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
14
486 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
15
438 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
16
459 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
17
203 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
18
202 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
19
413 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
20
497 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
21
428 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
22
442 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
23
441 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
24
495 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
25
391 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
26
491 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
27
492 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
28
496 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
29
191 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
30
223 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
31
408 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
32
404 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
33
429 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
34
419 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
35
409 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
36
426 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
37
164 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
38
425 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
39
187 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
40
181 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
41
165 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
42
498 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
43
424 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
44
456 of 2023
420,120-B, 504, 506
of IPC
45
453 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
46
194 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
47
499 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
48
504 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
49
448 of 2023
420,120-B, 504, 506
of IPC
50
458 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
51
454 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
52
449 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
53
161 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
54
407 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
55
490 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
56
213 of 2023
420,427, 120-B of IPC
57
417 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
58
487 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
59
403 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
60
423 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
61
209 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
62
488 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
63
430 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
64
412 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
65
414 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
66
415 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
67
411 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
68
236 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
69
205 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
70
505 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
71
392 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
72
221 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
73
479 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
74
139 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
75
483 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
76
452 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
77
147 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
78
416 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
79
463 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
80
410 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
81
175 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
82
494 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
83
201 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
84
493 of 2023
420,120-B of IPC
85
197 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
86
208 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
87
173 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
88
162 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
89
199 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
90
166 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
91
174 of 2024
420,120-B of IPC
92
365 of 2018
420,120-B of IPC
93
101 of 2016
420,506,406 of IPC
94
281 of 2019
420 of IPC
95
273 of 2019
420 of IPC
96
177 of 2019
420 of IPC
97
377 of 2018
420 of IPC
98
409 of 2018
420, 406 of IPC
99
405 of 2018
420 of IPC
100
399 of 2018
420 of IPC
101
192 of 2024
420, 406 of IPC
102
337 of 2018
420,120-B of IPC
103
336 of 2018
420 of IPC
104
287 of 2018
420,406 of IPC
105
241 of 2018
420,406 of IPC
106
286 of 2018
420,406 of IPC
107
278 of 2018
420,406 of IPC
108
345 of 2018
420 of IPC
109
109 of 2018
420 of IPC
110
276 of 2018
420,406 of IPC
111
288 of 2018
420,406 of IPC
112
275 of 2019
420 of IPC
113
263 of 2018
420,406 of IPC
114
176 of 2019
420 of IPC
115
308 of 2018
420,406 of IPC
116
179 of 2018
420, 406, 504, 506 of IPC
117
175 of 2019
420 of IPC
118
274 of 2019
420 of IPC
119
333 of 2018
420 of IPC
120
284 of 2018
420, 406 of IPC
Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that, in similar circumstances, the Coordinate Benches of this Court has granted relief by permitting common sureties in Criminal Misc. Application No. C-528 No.226 of 2024 decided on 16.08.2024 and Criminal Misc. Application No.C-528 No.369 of 2025 decided on 25.03.2025.
Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the application on the ground that the satisfaction of sureties lies within the discretion of the trial court, and the informants in the individual cases should also be heard before any blanket relief is granted.
This Court considered the submissions of both sides and perused the record. It is evident that the Applicant is facing multiple prosecutions, all arising out of similar allegations of cheating in the name of providing land/plots. In most of these cases, he has been enlarged on bail, but his continued incarceration is solely due to his inability to furnish separate sureties in each case.
The Coordinate Benches of this Court, in previous orders dated 16.08.2024 and 25.03.2025 passed in the matter of co-accused, Anjali Tyagi, have granted similar relief, allowing the Applicant to furnish common sureties in multiple cases. The present matter stands on the same footing.
This Court is, therefore, confronted with the question as to whether, in such exceptional circumstances, the Applicant may be permitted to furnish a single set of sureties and personal bond to operate across all the FIRs in which bail has already been granted.
The provisions of Section 441 of the Code of Criminal Procedure govern the nature and sufficiency of bonds and sureties to be executed upon the grant of bail. The law empowers the Court to determine, in each case, what conditions would reasonably secure the presence of the accused at trial.
In the opinion of this Court, when bail has already been granted in each of the 120 FIRs, and there is no allegation of breach of conditions or flight risk, the continued incarceration of the Applicant solely for want of multiple sureties is neither procedurally necessary nor constitutionally tenable.
This Court is also mindful of recent judicial observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in comparable contexts, particularly in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2024 INSC 617), where, in view of multiple prosecutions and the impossibility of furnishing distinct sureties in each case, the Hon’ble Apex Court permitted the accused to execute one personal bond and two common sureties per State, holding such a direction to be legally permissible, proportionate, and consistent with the mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution.
It has also been judicially recognised that when the substratum of allegations is common, the imposition of repetitive surety conditions may, in effect, operate as a denial of bail in substance, even where it has been formally granted.
In the present case, the multiplicity of FIRs appears to have created a procedural bottleneck, and not one rooted in any substantive apprehension of the Applicant's conduct.
In the interest of justice, to prevent undue hardship to the Applicant, and to secure his right to liberty, this Court deems it appropriate to allow this application.
The apprehension of abscondence raised by the State can be sufficiently addressed by imposing suitable conditions.
In view of the foregoing discussion, the present criminal misc. application is allowed, subject to the following conditions:
i. The Applicant shall furnish his current permanent address, along with valid proof thereof, to the satisfaction of the learned trial court and the investigating agency. He shall not change his residence without prior intimation to the trial court concerned.
ii. The learned courts below are directed to accept common sureties for the release of the Applicant in all the cases mentioned in the annexed list, wherein he has already been granted bail.
iii. The Applicant shall also provide a written undertaking to the effect that:
(a) He shall remain present before the Investigating Officer and the concerned courts as and when required;
(b) He shall not tamper with evidence or threaten or influence any witness;
(c) He shall not leave the country without prior leave of the competent court.
The Superintendent, District Jail, Haridwar, shall take all necessary steps for the Applicant’s release upon acceptance of the consolidated bond and sureties, unless his custody is required in any other unconnected matter.
It is clarified that this direction is being issued as a matter of legal and procedural economy, considering the large number of FIRs arising from similar allegations, and shall not be treated as a precedent in any unrelated proceedings.
Let a copy of this order be circulated to the District Judge, Haridwar, and to all concerned Judicial Magistrates and courts for immediate compliance.