I.A. Ansari, J.

1. When would a financier's act of re-possession of a vehicle, which is covered by a hire-purchase agreement, not amount to an offence of theft? This is the cardinal issue, which these two petitions have raised.

2. Both these Criminal Petitions, made under Section 482 CrPC, being inextricably connected with each other, have been heard together and are, therefore, being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

3. Before I enter into the merit of the two Criminal Petitions, the material facts, which have led to these two petitions, are set out as under:

Criminal Petition No. 225/2006

(i) By making the application under Section 482 CrPC, which has given rise to this Criminal Petition, the petitioner has sought for, inter alia, quashing the FIR, which has given rise to Dibrugarh Police Station Case No. 396/2006 under Section 379IPC. This FIR, which has been lodged, on 30.07.2006, by one Sri Ghanashyam Sarma (i.e. the petitioner in Criminal Petition No. 42/2007), reads thus:

To Date: 30.07.2006

The Officer-in-Charge,

Dibrugarh Police Station,

Dibrugarh.

Sub: F.I.R.

Dear Sir,

With due respect I have to state that on 22.07.2006 some miscreants forcibly took our vehicle b