IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.16658 of 2010 DHANANJAY KUMAR . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR . ----------- 2/ 20/05/2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The defence of the petitioner in a police case under Sections-419, 420, 467, 468 and 379 of Indian Penal Code and 135 of the Electricity Act is that the theft was allegedly being committed by named accused Dani Chauhan. Learned counsel for the State points out that the allegations against the petitioner are that he was a franchisee agent for collecting electricity dues and permitted the co-accused to consume electricity without proper connection on an understanding of a lumpsum payment to be made to him causing loss to the Electricity Board. Considering that co-accused Dani Chauhan has himself been enlarged on bail in Bail Petition No.1711/10 by the court below, as was submitted at the Bar, this application is disposed off with the observation that the court below shall proceed to enlarge him on bail on similar terms and conditions on which co-accused Dani Chauhan has been enlarged on - 2 - bail. The application stands disposed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)