1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3489 OF 2006 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3490 OF 2006. Ravi @ Ahmed Hasan Shaikh and Anr. .. Applicants Versus State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Ms.Pranali Kakade for applicant Mr.R.Y.Mirza, A.P.P. for State. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 4th October 2006. P.C. . Applicant in both these applicants is the 2 same. He has been enlarged on bail by the Sessions Court but he is unable to comply with the condition of furnishing the sureties in the sum of Rs.20,000/-. 2. For the reasons set out in the applications and also in my order in Application No.2645 of 2006, the condition imposed by the trial court to furnish surety in the sum of Rs.20,000/- is modified and the amount is reduced to Rs.15,000/-, in both applications. The condition to furnish local surety as also to report as imposed would remain unaffected and unaltered. Application disposed of. Needless to state that the applications are restricted to the C.Rs. which are mentioned in the application for bail and the order passed thereon by the trial court. Further needless to add that the applicant will have to furnish surety in each C.R. 3 (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J)