Mr. M.M.S. Bedi, J. (Oral) - Vide order dated 14.09.2011, the petitioners have been granted concession of bail and ordered that they would be released on bail on their furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds for a some of Rs.1 lac each with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

2. In the instant application, the prayer has been made for modification of the order dated 14.09.2011, praying that the condition furnishing local surety be dispensed with.

3. Learned counsel for U.T. has opposed this prayer relying upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hari Singh Mann Versus Harbhajan Singh Bajwa, AIR 2001 (SC) 43, laying down that it is not permissible for a Court under the cloak of Section 482 Cr.P.C. to review a judgment or order. I have considered the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the respondent/U.T. The petitioners are residents of Australia. In Shokhista Versus State, 2006 (1) RCR (Criminal) 636 and Agali E. Samki Versus State (NCT of Delhi), 2006 (4) RCR (Criminal) 759, the foreign national had been allowed bail on furnishing personal bond with cash security as he