JUDGMENT 1. - Learned PP is directed to accept notice on behalf of the State. He accepts the same. 2. Heard. 3. The brief facts of the case are that mustard was sent through a driver, which did not reach to its destination. An FIR No. 144/98, PS-Niwai, District-Tonk was lodged by the petitioner against two persons including driver named as Jafar. It is alleged that they sold the mustard and an amount of Rs. 2,50,000./- was recovered from them. Since mustard belonged to the petitioner, he claimed the sale price and the court of additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Newai ordered that in case he gives bank guarantee of Rs. 2,50,000/-, the amount be given to the petitioner. Since the accused persons absconded and the case is pending for last two years, the petitioner moved an application before the learned Magistrate to review its order and taken solvent surety of the amount instead of bank guarantee. Learned Magistrate was of the view that he could not review his earlier order. No revision was filed by the petitioner but he has directly come up before this court under section 482 Cr.P.C. 4. Learned PP has tried to justify the order of learned Magistrate. 5. Section 482 Cr.P.C. empowers the High Court to review or quash the order passed by a Magistrate and pass an appropriate order. The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to submit his solvent surely of the amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- and withdraw the amount of bank guarantee. 6. In the facts and circumstances of this case, I am of the view that no injustice would be done or no process of court will be mis-used if the petition is allowed and the petitioner is allowed to submit solvent surety of Rs. 2,50,000/- and withdraw the bank guarantee. 7. Consequently, the misc. petition is hereby allowed and it is ordered that on furnishing a solvent surety in the sum of Rs. 2,50,000/-, the trial court shall release the bank guarantee.Petition allowed. *******