Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that vide order dated 24.05.2019 passed in Bail Application No. 3249 of 2019: Mohd. Naiyyar Vs. State of U.P. arising out of Crime No 236 of 2019, under Sections 323, 452, 427, 506, 147, 148, 149 and 386 I.P.C., Police Station Gudamba, District Lucknow the petitioner has been enlarged on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 75,000/- along with two sureties of the like amount. Likewise he has been enlarged on bail on the basis of bail order dated 04.06.2019 passed in Bail Application No. 3566 of 2019: Mohd. Naiyyar Vs. State of U.P. arising out of Crime No. 281 of 1999, under Section 307 I.P.C., Police Station Gudamba, District Lucknow on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- along with two sureties of like amount. The accused is detained in jail since 30.04.2019 and he is unable to arrange separate sureties for aforesaid both crimes.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further stated that vide order dated 07.06.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Case U/s 482/378/407 No. - 4322 of 2019: Pawan Kumar Vs. State of U.P. this Court has permitted the accused of that case to furnish same sureties in six cases. Likewise, Hon'ble Supreme of India in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No. 8914-8915 of 2018: Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky Vs. The state of U.P. vide order dated 29.10.2018 has allowed the petitioner Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky to furnish same sureties in 31 cases.
In the aforesaid circumstances, the petitioner has to furnish two sureties for the aforesaid both crimes, but separate bail bonds shall be filed, as directed by the trial Court.
With the aforesaid observation/direction, the petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 29.8.2019 Arvind