1 APPP 191-2011 Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.191 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.376 OF 2011 Tariq Nabi Bhat ..Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent Mr.Mukesh Y. Dongarge i/b. Mr.Yuvraj D. Patil, Advocate, for the Applicant Mrs.P.P.Shinde, APP, for the Respondent - State CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATE : 29TH APRIL, 2011 P.C. . After the learned Counsel for the applicant was heard for some time, it seems that the applicant has furnished only one surety for a sum of Rs.25,000/- when the Order dated 5th March, 2011 clearly stipulated that he was supposed to furnish two solvent local sureties of Rs.25,000/-. The applicant was granted time to substitute cash security by furnishing regular bail. Now cash would also have to be furnished in the sum of Rs.25,000/- 2 APPP 191-2011 x 2 = Rs.50,000/- which the applicant must have deposited. Therefore, he should have no doubt that he is supposed to furnish two solvent sureties to substitute the cash deposited. The applicant states that he has also furnished only one surety in the sum of Rs.25,000/-. The applicant may furnish another surety in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with the registry of Sessions Court. Time to verify that surety is extended for a period of two weeks. 2. Criminal Application is disposed of. (R.C.CHAVAN, J.)