AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Pankaj Purohit, J
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
By means of this C528 application, applicant sought the indulgence of this Court for a direction to the learned trial court to enlarge the applicant on
bail by accepting one personal bond and two common sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
The facts of the case are that against the applicant-Neetesh Srivastava, as many as eight first information reports, were lodged in different districts
and following criminal cases are pending against him. The details of which are given hereinbelow:-
“1. S.T. No. 09/2022U/s 406, 420 of IPC & 3 UPID Act 2005 FIR No. 01/2019 Police Station-Rajasva Police Area Palu Almora before
Hon'ble District & Session Judge Almora. Dated 01.09.2023 (BA1/564/2023) passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Uttarakhand.
S.T. No. 10/2022 U/s 406, 420 of IPC & 3 UPID Act 2005 FIR No. 03/2020 Police Station-Kotwali Almora before Hon'ble District &
Session Judge Almora. Dated 02.01.2024 (BA1/548/2023) passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Uttarakhand.
S.T. No.05/2022 U/s 420, 120-B of IPC & 3 UPID Act 2005 FIR No. 27/2019 Police Station-Kapkot Bageshwar, before Hon'ble District
& Session Judge Bageshwar. Dated 09.11.2023 (BA1/2423/2023) passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Uttarakhand.
S.T. No. 06/2022 U/s 420, 409, 120-B & 3 UPID Act 2005 FIR No. 72/2019 Police Station-Kotwali Bageshwar before Hon'ble District &
Session Judge Bageshwar. Dated 09.11.2023 (BA1/2422/2023) passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Uttarakhand.
S.T. No. 02/2023 U/s 420, 409, 120-B of IPC & 3 UPID Act 2005 FIR No. 82/2019 Police Station-Kotwali Pithoragarh before
Hon’ble District & Session Judge Pithoragarh. Dated 19.12.2023 (BA1/2708/2623) passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Uttarakhand.
6.S.T. No. 02/2023U/s 420, 406 & 409 of IPC & 3 UPID Act FIR No. 205/2019 Police Station-Haldwani Nainital before 2005 Hon'ble
District & Session Judge Nainital. Dated 01.09.2023 (BA1/559/2023) passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Uttarakhand and order dated
06.05.2024 passed in a bail application being no. 57 of 2024 passed by district and sessions judge Nainital.
Criminal case No. 5810/2022 U/s 420 of IPC FIR No. 358/2019 Police Station-Kotwali Kashipur, U.S.Nagar before Hon'ble A.C.J.M.
Court Kashipur U.S.Nagar. Dated 02.09.2023 (BA1/233/2023) passed by the Hon'ble A.C.J.M. Court of Kashipur U.S. Nagar.
S.T. No. 06/2023 U/s 420, 409 and 120-B of IPC & 3 UPID Act 2005 in FIR No. 273/2019 Police Station-Ramnagar, District Nainital
before Hon'ble District & Session Judge Nainital. Dated 21.06.2024 (BA1/72/2024) passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Uttarakhand.â€
The applicant was released on bail by various orders passed by learned trial court as well as by the order of this Court in connection with the
aforesaid first information reports. Since the applicant has eight cases to his credit, he is unable to arrange for the sureties to give effect to the bail
orders, therefore, he is still under incarceration, despite the orders having been passed in the year 2023 as well.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in order to give effect to the bail orders passed in favour of the applicant, it would be conducive if the
Court would direct the applicant to be released on two common sureties and one personal bond in all the cases.
In order to buttress his submission, he relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Girish Gandhi vs. State of
Uttar Pradesh & others; reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 2142, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has passed the same order of two
common sureties each in various cases pending against the applicant-Girish Gandhi. He further relied upon the judgment and order passed by a Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Application No.1062 of 2022 decided on 01.07.2022, wherein the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has
granted the same relief to the applicant of that case who was also having two criminal cases.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that if such order would pass, the bail granted in favour of the applicant would be fructified,
otherwise, there is no use of granting bail to the applicant and he would remain under incarceration for all times to come as he is not in a position to
arrange as many as sixteen sureties for all the eight cases.
Per contra, learned State Counsel opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant on the ground that all the cases are pending in
different districts, therefore, it would not be proper to release the applicant on the same surety bond.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the citation as referred by learned counsel for the applicant and in the interest
of justice, in order to give effect to the provisions of the Code, it would be appropriate to pass such a direction that the applicant is released on bail by
the court concerned on his executing two common sureties in all the case along with personal bond.
Accordingly, the present C528 application stands allowed. It is provided that applicant may furnish two reliable sureties each to the satisfaction of
the courts concerned and the same shall hold good for all the eight cases pending before all courts concerned.
Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.