HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 99 of 2026 BHUPENDRA SEN versus STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Order Sheet Prisoner’s Leave Rules, 1989 have been amended and one of the general conditions attached in Form B provides that in every case and in all the case, it will also be mandatory for the surety to be from the state of Chhattisgarh.

In reply to this learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the local surety cannot be demanded in light of the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Moti Ram and Others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh {(1978) 4 SCC 47} .

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Moti Ram (supra) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held thus in paras 33, 34 & 35 which are reproduced hereinbelow:-

33. To add insult to injury, the magistrate has demanded sureties from his own district! (We assume the allegation in the petition). What is a Malayalee, Kannadiga, Tamil or Telugu to do if arrested for alleged misappropriation or theft or criminal trespass in Bastar, Port