IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.4173 of 2009 TRIPURARI KUMAR @ TRIPURARI SINGH S/O SRI MUNDRIKA PRASAD SINGH R/O VILL. MARANCHI TAJPUR, P.S. MARANCHI.DIST. PATNA. ----- PETITIONER. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----- OPP. PARTY. ----------- For the petitioner: Mr.Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate. For the State: Mr. C.Jawahar, APP. 02. 23.04.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The sole petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in a case instituted under Section 135 of the Electricity Act. As per allegation, the petitioner was found running one 5 HP motor pump for his agricultural purposes without obtaining valid connection from the Electricity Department due to which the Electricity Board suffered loss to the tune of Rs. 4, 25,000/-. The F.I.R. itself indicates that the motor pump from the field belonging to the petitioner was seized. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the witnesses have not supported the prosecution case. It has also been contended that the petitioner, in fact, wanted to get electricity connection, but, the same facility was being refused to him as the authorities wanted illegal gratification from the him. Learned counsel for the State draws attention of the court to the impugned order where it has been stated that the 2 witnesses, during the investigation, have supported the prosecution case. Having considered the rival submissions and after going through the record, this court is of the view that no case for anticipatory bail has been made out. Accordingly, the application seeking anticipatory bail stands rejected. Sym/ (Kishore K. Mandal, J.)