- (1.) PALOK Basu, J. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and also Sri Verma, learned Assistant Government Advocate. They agree that the petition should be decided finally the certified copy of the Sessions Judge, dated 24-3-1988 has already been filed along with this petition.
(2.) THE facts of the present case are that the applicant was involved in case rime No. 86 of 1985 which purports to be under Section 409, I. P. C. relating to Police Station Hyderabad, District Kheri. THE IV Additional Sessions Judge by virtue of impugned order, dated 24-3-1988 directed that the applicant should be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties. It was also directed that the two sureties should be of gazetted officers, THE learned counsel for the applicant contended that this part of the condition whereby it was directed that the sureties should either be of gazetted officers of the State or Gazetted officers of the Central Government is against the law. The learned counsel has relied upon the decision reported in Akhtar v. State, 1984 Allahabad Criminal Case p. 202 wherein a learned Single Judge has held that asking the cash straightaway from an accused who is otherwise entitled to bail was not justified. The learned counsel for the applicant further relied upon the fact that by virtue of Section 437 special reasons have to be incorporated in case some additional conditions are being imposed at the time of granting bail. It is stated that in the impugned order no such special reasons have been stated which may justify the imposition of the condition that only gazetted officers should be asked to be sureties of the applicant. It is pressed that in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 409, Cr. P. C. this part of the order shall be quashed.
(3.) I find enough force in the argument of the learned counsel. No con trary provision or authority has been shown by the State. Under the circumstances this application under Section 482, Cr. P. C. is allowed. The order of the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur-Kheri dated 24-3-1988 is modified to the extent that the sureties may be local sureties of Lakhimpur-Kheri and need not be either Gazetted officer of the State of Uttar Pradesh.;