1 Cri. Appln. No.3395/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3395 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.243 OF 2011 Rafiyabee w/o Parvez Qureshi & ors. ... PETITIONERS VERSUS Parvez Qureshi s/o Jamil Qureshi ... RESPONDENT ..... Shri D.S. Manorkar, Advocate for petitioners Shri M.A. Latif, Advocate for respondent – absent ..... CORAM : U.D. SALVI, J. DATED : 1st December, 2011. PER COURT : 1. A clarification is sought regarding interpretation of the word “surety”, mentioned in para 4 of the order dated 24.6.2011. Perusal of the order dated 24.6.2011 reveals that the petitioner/ wife Rafiyabee was permitted to withdraw the amount deposited by the applicant in Criminal Revision Application No.337/2009 – her husband Parvez Qureshi before the learned Family Court; and one of the conditions for withdrawal was to furnish surety by her before the said Family Court. It is submitted that, the Family Court is insisting upon Bank Guarantee. 2 Cri. Appln. No.3395/2011 2. Plain reading of the word “surety” connotes that this would be a “solvent surety” and so shall it be read. Criminal Application No.3395/2011 stands disposed off accordingly. ( U.D. SALVI, J. ) fmp/cri3395.11