JUDGMENT 1. - Notice was given to the Public Prosecutor, who has accepted the same. 2. Heard. Perused the relevant record. The petitioner was convicted by the learned MJM, Pipar City, for the offences under sections 454 and 380 Indian Penal Code vide his judgment dated 23.6.93 and sentenced to two years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. five hundred and in default to further undergo six months' R.I. on each count. It was also directed that both the substantive sentences shall run concurrently. The petitioner filed an appeal against the said judgment and the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2, Jodhpur by his judgment dated 7.3.94 partly allowed the said appeal and while maintaining his conviction for the said offences, instead of sentencing him, directed that if the petitioner executed personal bond and surety bond for an amount of Rs. five thousand each for keeping peace and be of good conduct and behaviour for a period of two years, he be released on probation of good conduct. The petitioner was also directed to furnish personal bond and surety bond by 6.4.94 failing which he will serve the sentence. It appears that the petitioner did not execute/furnish personal bond and surety bond within the stipulated period and, as such, non bailable warrant for his arrest for serving-out the sentence was issued and he was arrested and, at present, he is lodged in Central Jail, Jodhpur. 3. The contention of Mr. Choudhary is that the petitioner is a poor labour and on the date of the judgment of the appellate court, he was not present in that court; that he went to earn his livelihood on the Rajasthan Canal and his advocate, who did not have petitioner's address, could not inform him. He has submitted that the petitioner is under detention since last four months and he is prepared to furnish the probation bonds and, as such, the period for furnishing the bonds be extended. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed this petition. 5. The petitioner belongs to Meghwal community. He is poor and illiterate. As per affidavit of Smt. Tulsi Devi, wife of petitioner, she also could not inform the petitioner, who had gone to earn his livelihood on the Rajasthan Canal. Mr. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed this petition. 5. The petitioner belongs to Meghwal community. He is poor and illiterate. As per affidavit of Smt. Tulsi Devi, wife of petitioner, she also could not inform the petitioner, who had gone to earn his livelihood on the Rajasthan Canal. Mr. P.R. Choudhary, who was representing the petitioner before the appellate court also, has submitted that for want of petitioner's address, he could not inform about the judgment passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2, Jodhpur. Therefore, keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case, I feel that to meet the ends of justice, the petitioner should be given an opportunity to submit his personal bond and surety bond in terms of the judgment dated 7.3.94 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2, Jodhpur. 6. Accordingly, this petition is allowed and it is directed that if the petitioner Kanwara Ram executes his personal bond and surety bond for an amount of Rs. five thousand each in terms of judgment dated 7.3.94 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2, Jodhpur to the satisfaction of the learned trial Magistrate on or before 15.3.95, he be released on probation of good conduct.Petition allowed. *******