1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 564 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4297 OF 2008 Mohamed Sayed Mohamed Yasin Shaikh. ... Applicant. V/s. 1. State of Maharashtra. 2. Central Bureau of Investigation. ... Respondents. Nitin Sejpal with Pooja Bhojne for the applicant. Ms.S.D.Shinde, A.P.P. for respondent No.1- State. Raja Thakare with A.M.Chimalkar for respondent No.2. CORAM : V.C.DAGA, J. DATED : 5th March 2010. P.C. : The letter addressed to this Court by the son of the applicant- accused was taken on record. He was reprimanded in the Court. Today he has filed affidavit tendering apology for sending letter to this Court. He is also suitably warned. It appears that since accused, his father could not comply with the conditions 2 prescribed in the order dated 24th June, 2009, as such out of anxiety, he must have written subject letter. He tendered apology. The same is accepted. 2. This application moved by the applicant is for modification of the conditions (a) and (b) imposed by this Court while granting bail vide order dated 24th June, 2009. 3. Condition (a) relates to the execution of personal bond in the sum of Rs.3,00,000/- with two local solvent sureties to make up the said amount, whereas condition (b) refers to direction to the applicant/ accused to report to the Bund Garden Police Station every alternate day and not to leave the jurisdiction of the Pune Corporation. 4. The fact remains that in spite of more than nine months the said order could not be acted upon by the applicant for want of furnishing surety as ordered by this Court finding it difficult to comply with the requirements of the order. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for the respondents, by consent of parties, the amount of surety is reduced to Rs.50,000/- In addition to this, applicant is directed to furnish two local sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/-. 3 6. So far as condition (b) is concerned, learned counsel for the applicant submits that instead of Bund Garden Police Station, applicant may be allowed to attend the office of the Central Bureau of Investigation, Kolkata since he has no place to stay at Pune. Since the prosecution has no objection to modify this condition, applicant is allowed to attend the office of the Central Bureau of Investigation, Kolkata every alternate day. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes to furnish address of the accused and further undertakes not to remain absent during trial and that he shall not seek adjournment on the ground of his non-availability. 7. Both conditions (a) and (b) of the order dated 24th June, 2009 stand modified accordingly. Rest of the order stands as it is. (V.C.DAGA J.)