ORDER : 1. In the petition on hand, condition No.1 to the extent of directing the petitioner to deposit Rs.20,000/-while granting bail to him by order passed by Court of Sessions, Palakkad in Crime No.52/2019 of Palakkad Excise Range, Palakkad, copy of which is appended to this petition as Annexure-A, is sought to be set aside. The petitioner is the 1st accused in the above crime, wherein offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the NDPS Act') were alleged against him. 2. As per the allegation of the prosecution 6.3 Kgs of ganja was seized from the possession of accused by Excise Inspector, Palakkad Excise Range and party on 13.06.2019 at around 11.15 a.m from a place near the electric post bearing No.B.B/DPO-11/N-17 in the link road behind K.S.R.T.C Bus Stand in Yakkara Village in Palakkad Taluk and they were caught red handed. 3. Bail was granted to the petitioner by Court of Sessions, Palakkad on 12.7.2019 by Annexure-A order. While ordering to release the petitioner on bail, the court had imposed five conditions, the first among which is under challenge herein. While imposing condition No.1, the court has directed the petitioner to execute a bond for Rs.1,00,000/-with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to its satisfaction. The court has further directed that the sureties must be his parents and close relatives. A direction to deposit Rs.20,000/-as cash security simultaneous to the execution of the bail bond, was also incorporated in the order. 4. Aggrieved by the direction to deposit Rs.20,000/-as cash security simultaneous to the execution of the bail bond, the petitioner has approached this Court in the petition on hand seeking to set aside the same. 5. The petitioner is a man having his permanent address at Tamil Nadu. That may be the reason for Court of Sessions, Palakkad to impose an additional condition of the nature in the order granting bail. 6. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the petitioner is prepared to execute a bond for Rs.1,00,000/-as directed with parents and close relatives as solvent sureties. According to him, the petitioner is only aggrieved of the direction to deposit cash worth Rs.20,000/- as security. 7. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner being in custody is unable to raise the money to make the deposit as directed. 8. According to him, the petitioner is only aggrieved of the direction to deposit cash worth Rs.20,000/- as security. 7. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner being in custody is unable to raise the money to make the deposit as directed. 8. It is pertinent to note that bail was granted to the petitioner by order passed as early as on 12.07.2019. But, even after passage of two months, he could not enjoy the fruits of the order. Therefore, this Court finds merits in the submission of the learned counsel that it is impracticable for the petitioner to raise Rs.20,000/- 9. The courts must be vigilant to see that the conditions imposed while granting bail are reasonable ones and must have some purpose in it. 10. The condition insisting deposit of Rs.20,000/-would not serve any better purpose than the other conditions imposed by the court in the disputed order. In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is inclined to show some indulgence in the matter. In the result, the petition on hand is allowed. Condition No.1 to the extent it directs deposit of Rs.20,000/-as cash security simultaneous to the execution of the bail bond, is hereby set aside. The petitioner shall abide by the other conditions to enjoy the fruits of the order granting bail.