9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 1140X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with the situation where the accused enlarged on bail is unable to find sureties, as ordered, in multiple cases, there is also a need to balance the requirement of furnishing the sureties with his or her fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. An order which would protect the person s fundamental right under Article 21 and at the same time guarantee the presence, would be reasonable and proportionate. As to what such an order should be, will again depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. It is directed that for the FIRs pending in each of the States of Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Punjab and Uttarakhand, in each State, the petitioner will furnish his personal bond for Rs. 50,000/- and furnish two sureties who shall execute the bond for Rs. 30,000/- each which shall hold good for all FIRs in the concerned State, for cases mentioned in the chart set out hereinabove. The same set of sureties is permitted to stand as surety in all the States. This direction will meet the ends of justice and will be proportionate and reasonable. Petition allowed. - B. R. GAVAI And K. V. VISWANATHAN , JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. Prem Prakash, AOR Mr. Aditya Harsh, Ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Place of FIR Bail Conditions 1. 190/2020 P.S. Savina, Udaipur, Rajasthan Personal Bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- including one local surety. 2. 1028/2020 P.S. Civil Lines, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh Personal Bond and furnishing of two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court (amount not mentioned). 3. 685/2020 P.S. Vrindavan, Mathura, Uttar Pradesh Personal Bond and furnishing of two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court (amount not mentioned). 4. 190/2020 P.S. Kotgate, Bikaner, Rajasthan Personal Bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each. 5. 309/2020 P.S. Siddhartha Nagar, Siddhartha Nagar, Uttar Pradesh Personal Bond of Rs. 75,000/- and two sureties of Rs. 75,000/- each. 6. 146/2020 P.S. Jwalapur, Haridwar, Uttarakhand Personal Bond and furnishing of two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court (amount not mentioned). 7. 53/2020 P.S. Pinarayi, Pinarayi, Kerala Personal Bond of Rs. 10,000/- and two solvent sureties of Rs. 10,000/- each. 8. 343/2020 P.S. Kotwali, Mathura, Uttar Pradesh Personal Bond and furnishing of two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for a direction that the personal bonds and the sureties that are executed in connection with FIR No.0030 of 2021, dated 21.01.2021, registered at P.S. Sadar, District Gurugram, should be held good for the other bail orders set out in the prayer clause of the petition. 2. Issue notice to the respondents. 3. Dasti, in addition, is permitted. 4. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to serve the standing counsel for the respondent-States. 5. List the matter on 15.04.2024 for further consideration. 9. To this Writ Petition, the States of Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttarakhand and Jail Superintendent Bhondsi Jail, Gurugram are arrayed as Respondent no. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 respectively. A perusal of the chart mentioned above would reveal that while in the State of Uttar Pradesh there are six FIRs, in Haryana there are two FIRs, in Punjab there is one FIR, in Rajasthan there are two FIRs and in Uttarakhand there is one FIR. There is also one FIR in Kerala where sureties have already been furnished. 10. As far as the State of Haryana is concerned, out of the two FIRs where bail orders have been obtained, sureties have been furnished in FIR No. 30 of 2021 registered at Poli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner had filed Writ Petition (Criminal) Diary No.20302 of 2024 in this Court. We noticed that the said proceeding is disposed of giving him liberty to approach the High Court. We say nothing more insofar as FIR No. 608 of 2022 is concerned. 15. A prayer is made that the bail granted in FIR No. 222 dated 08.09.2020 registered at P.S. Tulsipur, District Balrampur, U.P. be allowed to enure to the benefit of the petitioner in connection with FIR No. 0141 of 2023 dated 21.5.2023 registered at PS Tulsipur, District Balrampur, U.P. We outrightly reject this prayer. The petitioner is at liberty to move appropriate proceedings which may be decided in accordance with law and uninfluenced by the present order. We are in the present matter only concerned as to whether insofar as the eleven FIRs are concerned in which bail has already been granted, there could be any order for consolidation of sureties and, if so, in what manner. Contentions : 16. We have heard Mr. Prem Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned senior counsels and counsels appearing for the respective States. We have considered the documents on record and the arguments advanced by the parties. Analysis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is Code, it is proved to the satisfaction of the Court by which the bond was taken, or of any Court to which the case has subsequently been transferred, or of the Court of any Magistrate of the first class, that the bond has been forfeited, the Court shall record the grounds of such proof, and may call upon any person bound by such bond to pay the penalty thereof or to show cause why it should not be paid. 20. As set out earlier, the cases against the petitioner span over six States. Insofar as the case in Kerala is concerned, he has already furnished sureties and there is only one case in that State. Insofar as Haryana is concerned, of the two cases, he has furnished sureties in one and in the other case what has been ordered is Fixed Deposit Receipt (FDR) for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-. We do not propose to interfere with this order. The remaining States are Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Punjab and Uttarakhand. In these States, even though in the cases concerned, the bail has been ordered, the petitioner is still in custody because he is unable to furnish sureties. 21. The Oxford Dictionary defines surety as a person who takes responsibility for another s obligation . Advanced Law Lexic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e 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. With these observations, the Special Leave Petitions are disposed of. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. In Hani Nishad (supra) only one State was involved, as all the cases were pending in the State of Uttar Pradesh. 26. We may also usefully note the order of this Court In Re Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail in SMWP (Criminal) No. 4/2021 reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 483. By the order dated 31.01.2023, this Court endorsing certain directions sought by the Amicus Curiae passed an order for compliance with those directions. The two relevant directions are extracted hereunder : - 6) If the bail bonds are not furnished within one month from the date of grant bail, the concerned Court may suo moto take up the case and consider whether the conditions of bail require modification/relaxation. 7) One of the reasons which delays the release of the accused/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ajasthan, Punjab and Uttarakhand, in each State, the petitioner will furnish his personal bond for Rs. 50,000/- and furnish two sureties who shall execute the bond for Rs. 30,000/- each which shall hold good for all FIRs in the concerned State, for cases mentioned in the chart set out hereinabove. The same set of sureties is permitted to stand as surety in all the States. We feel that this direction will meet the ends of justice and will be proportionate and reasonable. For the State of Uttar Pradesh, the above direction shall hold good for FIR No. 1028/2020 registered at P.S. Civil Lines, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, FIR No. 685/2020 registered at P.S. Vrindavan, Mathura, Uttar Pradesh, FIR No. 309/2020 registered at P.S. Siddhartha Nagar, Siddhartha Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, FIR No. 343/2020 registered at P.S. Kotwali, Mathura, Uttar Pradesh, FIR No. 294/2020 registered at P.S. Sipri Bazar, Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh and FIR No. 222/2020 registered at P.S. Tulsipur, Balrampur, Uttar Pradesh. Insofar as the State of Uttar Pradesh is concerned, the personal bond for Rs. 50,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs. 30,000/- shall be executed in regard to FIR No. 685/2020 registered at P.S. Vrindavan, M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
