JUDGMENT 1. - This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.RC. seeks quashing of a condition of furnishing bank guarantee imposed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Bharatpur vide his order dated 18.6.2004 in a case FIR No. 237/2004 PS Nadbai, Distt. Bharatpur for the offence under Section 16/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950. 2. Petitioner Govind Singh was alleged to be found in possession of 100 bottles of country made liquor in tubes. His bail application under Section 437 Cr.P.C. was rejected by the learned Judicial Magistrate Nadbai on 16.6.2004. He was however, ordered to be released on bail under section 439 Cr.PC. by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge No. 2, Bharatpur vide his order dated 18.6.2004 but on his furnishing a personal bond with a surety in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- to the satisfaction of the trial Court alongwith a bank guarantee in the like amount with a stipulation that in the event of his being found repeating the alleged offence, the amount of bank guarantee shall stand forfeited in favour of the State. 3. His learned counsel has contended that though conditions may be imposed for releasing the accused on bail but the same should not be onerous of furnishing of bank guarantee in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- alongwith bail bond in the like amount with a stipulation that the said amount of bank guarantee shall stand forfeited in the event of his being found repeating the alleged offence is unreasonable and onerous. Learned PP also could not controvert this contention. 4. I have considered the submissions made at the bar and have also perused the relevant documents. 5. It is true that while directing the release of the accused, the court may impose conditions. It is equally well settled that such conditions should not be unreasonable and onerous and should not be such as may deny him the opportunity of being released on bail due to his inability to comply with such conditions. 6. In the instant case looking to the nature of alleged offence and the fact that the petitioner is neither a previous convict nor there is any allegation that any other cases involving the offence alleged in this case or other offences are pending against him. 6. In the instant case looking to the nature of alleged offence and the fact that the petitioner is neither a previous convict nor there is any allegation that any other cases involving the offence alleged in this case or other offences are pending against him. I think that the imposition of additional condition of furnishing the bank guarantee with the stipulation that the same shall be forfeited in case he repeats the alleged offence is onerous and unreasonable and deserves to be set-aside and quashed for securing the ends of justice in exercise of the inherent powers of this Court vested under Section 482 Cr.RC. 7. Consequently, this petition is partly allowed and Condition No. 2 in the order dated 18.6.2004 of the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, No. 2, Bharatpur with regard to furnishing of bank guarantee is hereby quashed and set-aside. Rest of the order shall remain intact and shall be given effect to by the concerned.Petition Partly Allowed. *******