Kali Shankar v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12553 of 2023 Applicant :- Kali Shankar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Suresh Kumar Yadav,Dinesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.

¶2This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to direct the court below to allow the applicant to submit only a personal bond and one surety sureties in lieu of one case.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in a case, details of which is as under:

(i). 481/2018 under Section 498-A/304-B/307 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Bihar, District Unnao.

¶4It has been submitted that the applicant has been granted bail by this Court in the aforesaid case, but furnishing of two sureties is almost impracticable as the applicant is very poor person and he will not be able to arrange two sureties to get bail.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has also relied the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hani Nishad @ Mohammad Imran @ Vikky Vs. The State of Uttar Praesh [SLP (Crl.) No.8914-8915/2018].

¶6Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer of the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that it is always the discretion and satisfaction of the trial court, so far as the acceptance of the sureties is concerned.

¶7Having heard learned counsel for the rival parties, it appears that the only grievance of the applicant appears to be that, despite having obtained the order of the bail in the said case, he is not able to come out of the prison for the reason that he is unable to find two sureties for the case and, thus, a prayer has been made that, applicant be permitted to file single surety in the aforesaid case and a suitable direction in this regard be given to the court below.

¶8The acceptance of the surety and their verification is the prerogative of the trial court and the same, in any case, could not be controlled by this Court. SufÏcient guidelines in this regard have already been given by the High Court on administrative side to the subordinate courts. However, as far as the grievance of the applicant, pertaining to the fact that he is not in a position to arrange two sureties for the case, is concerned, the answer to this apprehension and grievance is implicit in Section 441-A of Code of Criminal Procedure, which is reproduced as under:- "Declaration by sureties-Every person standing surety to an accused person for his release on bail, shall make a declaration before the Court as to the number of persons to whom he has stood surety including the accused, giving therein all the relevant particulars."

¶9Perusal of this Section shows that, a person, who is intending to be the surety of any accused person, is obliged to declare before the Court that apart from the person, to whom he is standing surety, for how many other accused persons, he has stood surety. Therefore, the texture of the Section 441-A of the Cr.P.C., which has been introduced by way of amendment made in the year 2006 clearly reflects that a person may stand surety for more than one accused person and in more than one case. So there appears no bar for a person to stand surety in more than one case and also for more than one accused person.

¶10However, as stated earlier, the status, verification and the competency of the surety will always be assessed by the trial court before acceptance.

¶11Thus, it is directed that, if one surety of Rs.25,000/- is placed before the court below and they are otherwise competent and their status and other particulars have been duly verified, the court below, in its discretion, may accept the same in the said case mentioned hereinbefore.

¶12With the aforesaid observations, the application is finally disposed of. Order Date :- 21.12.2023 Gaurav/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench