JUDGMENT 1. - At the joint request of the parties, this petition is being disposed of at the admission stage. 2. I have heard Shri Praveen Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri S.C. Purohit, learned Public Prosecutor and also carefully gone through the order impugned in this petition under Section 482 Cr.PC. 3. The accused petitioner was convicted by the trial court for offence under Sections 457 and 380 read with Section 511 IPC and was sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500/-on each count vide judgment dated 6.12.2000. On appeal, the appellate court vide its judgment dated 7.7.2000 while maintaining conviction, of the petitioner, extended him the benefit of probation. The appellate court directed the petitioner to submit bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 5000/- within one month, for a period of one years in the trial court for keeping peace and be of good behaviour. 4. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner could not furnish the bail bonds within the period stipulated, as he was not. aware of the order dated 7.7.2001 inasmuch as, the counsel representing the ' petitioner in the trial court failed to inform the petitioner of the order dated 7.7.2001. Learned counsel points out that having come to know about the order, the petitioner immediately furnished the bail bonds on 6.9.2001. However, the trial court did not accept the bail bonds. It is submitted that the petitioner has been taken in custody and lodged in jail to undergo the sentenced awarded by the trial Court and he is now is custody since 6.9.2001. 5. Through this petition under Section 482 Cr.PC. counsel for the petitioner has prayed for extension of time. Relying upon a decision of this Court in Balbeer Singh v. State of Rajasthan, (1999 (1) R.C.C. 692) learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that, In similar circumstance this Court extended time to submit the bail bonds. 6. In the above case, the petitioner was extended benefit of probation in 1991 by the appellate Court, but he could not furnish the bail bonds and was taken into custody on 3.3.1999. This Court allowed the petition and extended time to furnish the bail bonds. as directed by the appellate Court. 6. In the above case, the petitioner was extended benefit of probation in 1991 by the appellate Court, but he could not furnish the bail bonds and was taken into custody on 3.3.1999. This Court allowed the petition and extended time to furnish the bail bonds. as directed by the appellate Court. In the case in hand, the petitioner was directed to furnish bail bonds vide order dated 7.7.2001 but he failed to do so and was taken into custody on 6.09.2001. 7. Having gone through the material on record and in view of the case cited above, I consider it just and proper to allow the petition. Consequently, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to furnish the bail bonds now as directed by the appellate Court vide its judgment dated 7.7.2001. On his furnishing the bail bonds in terms of the judgment of the appellate Court, the petitioner shall be released from jail, if not wanted in any other case. The petition stands disposed of.Petition disposed of as above. *******