1 105.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.105 OF 2011 Harikant Shrinikhedi Yadav ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent ...... None for Petitioner. Mr.D.P.Adsule, A.P.P. for Respondent/State. ...... CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND A.R.JOSHI, JJ. DATED:- JANUARY 24, 2011. P.C. 1. This is letter Petition received through jail. The Petitioner has been granted furlough leave in terms of order dated 24th/25th September, 2010. However, the Petitioner has challenged that order because one of the condition imposed on the Petitioner is that he should furnish local surety. Admittedly, the Petitioner hails from Bihar. It is the case of the Petitioner that he is not in a position to offer local surety. 2. This question has been addressed by us in the case of Subodh Prasad Urf Anil Chotu Jagdish Mahato vs. State of Maharashtra in Criminal Writ Petition No.2343 of 2009 decided on 7th September, 2010. 2 105.11 In view of the said Judgment, the condition imposed by the Appropriate Authority of furnishing local surety cannot be sustained. The same is set- aside with direction to the Appropriate Authority to re-examine the request of the Petitioner and pass fresh order keeping in mind the observations made in the above said Judgment. The Appropriate Authority will be free to impose such other reasonable conditions for grant of furlough leave to the Petitioner as may be advised and permissible by law. The Appropriate Authority shall take fresh decision in the matter concerning the Petitioner’s request for release on furlough leave as expeditiously as possible and not later than six weeks from today. Besides, it shall communicate its decision to the Petitioner within the same time. 3. Petition is disposed of on the above terms. 4. Copy of this order be forwarded to the petitioner, who is in jail forthwith for information. (A.R.JOSHI, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)