Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.9203 of 2012 ====================================================== Kaushik Himatsingka .... .... Petitioner. Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 27-03-2012 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a complaint case in which cognizance has been taken for the offences punishable under [STATUTE] . It is alleged that the truck was purchased by the sister-in-law of the complainant which was financed by the petitioner. One Pratik Vikil hired the truck in question when this petitioner boarded the truck and subsequently the truck was taken away by the accused persons. The case of the petitioner is that due to non-payment of loan amount the truck was seized by the finance company of the petitioner. The case was instituted in 1998 subsequently the petitioner challenged cognizance order in Cr. Misc. No. 409 of Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9203 of 2012 (2) dt.27-03-2012 2 / 3 2 2001 which stood dismissed on 30.01.2003. The order of this Court was also challenged in S.L.P.(Cr.) No. 2390 of 2003 when arrest was stayed by the Apex Court as gets reflected from Annexure-2. Thereafter the matter was finally disposed off on 19.07.2011 when S.L.P.was dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to apply for bail hence the present bail application. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the truck in question was released in favour of informant who is holding power of attorney on behalf of the sister-in-law with regard to truck in question but all these facts have been suppressed by the complainant. Considering the nature of accusation arising out of dispute with regard to hire purchase dispute between the sister-in-law of the complainant and the petitioner, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today in connection with Complaint Case No. 376 of 1998, T.R. No. 208 of 2011, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned J.M. Ist Class, Samastipur, subject to the conditions as laid down Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9203 of 2012 (2) dt.27-03-2012 3 / 3 3 under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. U.K./- (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 379

Statute Text:
Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. Theft. Whoever commits theft shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.