ORDER l. Heard on admission. 2. 1 have perused the order impugned dated 4-1-2011 passed by the Special Judge (NDPS Act), Mahasamund in Criminal MJC No.42/2010 relating to interim custody of the Bolero vehicle. 3. Vide the aforesaid order learned Special Judge has directed for inter m custody of Bolero vehicle in favour of the applicant on furnishing bank guarantee of Rs.6 lakhs with other conditions. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that cost of Bolero would be below Rs.6 lakhs and it would not be just, proper and reasonable to impose the condition for furnishing bank guarantee. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the petition. 6. While passing the order of interim custody the Courts are required to impose reasonable condition for compliance of the order and are required to ensure that such condition would not constitute denial of interim custody or frustrate the order. As per case of the prosecution, the vehicle in question was involved in the offence punishable under the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and cost of the alleged Bolero vehicle would be Rs.6 lakhs. For submitting bank guarantee the petitioner is required to deposit money to the extent of such bank guarantee in the bank. Definitely, this would be a hardship to the petitioner and some time it may amount to denial of interim custody. 7. Consequently, the petition is partly allowed and the condition relating to furnishing bank guarantee of Rs.6 lakhs is hereby quashed. The petitioner shall furnish solvent surety of the State of Chhattisgarh, of the aforesaid amount of Rs.6 lakhs. Petition Allowed.