JUDGEMENT SANJAY Karol, J. A.S.I., Bhagat Ram, Police Station, Rampur Bushahr, District Shimla is present alongwtih record. Record perused and returned. Status report filed. 2. F.I.R. No.168/2012 was registered at Police Station, Rampur Bushahr, District Shimla, H.P. on 19.9.2012, under the provisions of Sections 379 and 411 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Apprehending arrest, petitioner approached this Court seeking bail under the provisions of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On 20.3.2013, this Court passed an interim order, directing that in the event of arrest, petitioner shall be enlarged on bail, subject to his complying with the conditions imposed therein. The said interim order is in operation till date. As per the case of prosecution, petitioner alongwith two persons committed theft of a vehicle at Rampur. The vehicle was driven from Rampur to Chandigarh by the petitioner. Thereafter, the same was sold to a 3rd person. 3. MR . R.S. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General also submits that one of the co-accused has already been granted bail by the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Rampur which order has not been assailed by the State. It is seen that the main allegation against the petitioner is that he drove the vehicle from Rampur to Chandigarh. Petitioner has fully cooperated during investigation. Money of Rs.5,50,000/- has already been recovered from co-accused (Rajesh Kumar) who already stands enlarged on bail. 4. THE investigation in the case is almost complete. Keeping in view the entire attending circumstances and taking a holistic view of the matter, the petitioner has made out a case in his favour. Having perused the status report as also heard learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that prima facie the petitioner has made out a case for grant of bail. His custodial interrogation is not required at all. 5. THIS Court has taken into account the nature of accusation, the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the material so far collected by the prosecution during investigation. I am of the considered view that there is no apprehension made out by the State that in the event of the petitioner being enlarged on bail, he would tamper with the witnesses or extend any threats to the complainant. I am of the considered view that there is no apprehension made out by the State that in the event of the petitioner being enlarged on bail, he would tamper with the witnesses or extend any threats to the complainant. There is no probability of the petitioner abusing his liberty nor would he interfere or in any manner impede with the course of justice. Petitioner is also not likely to flee from justice. He, through his learned counsel, undertakes to make himself available during the course of investigation, if required, as also during trial, if any. 6. HAVING taken into consideration the overall attending circumstances, the petitioner has been able to show that there is reason to believe that the threat of arrest is imminent. For all the aforesaid reasons, interim order dated 20.3.2013 is made absolute. The petitioner shall be on bail till such time Challan is presented in the Court for trial where after he shall approach the Court for regular bail, in accordance with law. Needless to add, during this period petitioner shall fully comply with all the statutory conditions laid down under the provisions of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. As a matter of abundant caution, it is clarified that petitioner shall neither tamper with the evidence nor try to influence the witnesses. He shall make himself available for investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer. He shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. 7. ANY observation made herein above shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the matter uninfluenced by any observation made herein above. With the aforesaid observations, present petition stands disposed of. Copy Dasti.