Patna High Court - Orders
Sibeshwar Ray vs The Bihar State Power Holding Company ... on 28 February, 2023
Author: Purnendu Singh
Bench: Purnendu Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14578 of 2016
======================================================
Sibeshwar Ray Son of Late Ramautar Rai, Resident of Village- Vishwanath
Nagar, P.S- Town, District- Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited and Ors
2. The Managing Director, North Bihar Power Distribution Company Limited,
NBPDCL Vidyut Bhawan, Baile
3. The General Manager, Tirhut area NBDCL, Muzaffarpur.
4. The DGM Electrical Superintending Engineer, Electric Supply Circle, Tirhut
Area, Muzaffarpur.
5. The Electrical Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Division, Begusarai. null
null
6. The Assistant Electrical Engineer, Electric Supply Subdivision, Begusarai.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bajarangi, Advocate
Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, Senior Advocate
Mr. Vijay Verma, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 28-02-2023Heard Mr. Bajarangi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the erstwhile Electricity Board which has been reconstituted as per the Electricity Act, 2012 into different power holding companies. The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the Patna High Court CWJC No.14578 of 2016(3) dt.28-02-2023 2/3 respondent who are not returning Rs. 1,08,000/- which was realised by the erstwhile Electricity Board on account of theft of electricity pursuant to which Begusarai Town P.S. Case No. 221 of 2013 was registered under Section 379 I.P.C. read with Section 39/44 of the Electricity Act of the provision and Electricity Act, 1910.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that he has brought on record the judgment and order dated 29.08.2013 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 63 of 2009 by the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Begusarai by which the petitioner has been acquitted from all charges leveled against him. The petitioner has limited his prayer that he is aggrieved by the malafide action of the erstwhile Electricity Board and the authorities of the Power Holding Company that once the petitioner has been acquitted renderring the charges made against him in F.I.R. No. 221 of 2003 to be non existence. The respondents are under obligation to return the amount of penalty realised on account of theft of electricity.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent-Power Holding Company submitted that the penalty was realised in terms of the provision of Electricity Act for theft of electricity by the petitioner and the petitioner as on date Patna High Court CWJC No.14578 of 2016(3) dt.28-02-2023 3/3 cannot be allowed to realise the said amount.
5. Having considered the rival submissions of the parties and materials available on record, it is admitted that petitioner has been acquitted vide order dated 29.08.2013 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 63 of 2009 and the respondent Electricity Board/ Power Holding Company have not challenged the said order before any superior Court the order as on date has become final and absolute and in such circumstances the respondent cannot be allowed to take plea of theft on non- existing F.I.R. The respondents are under obligation to return back forthwith an amount of Rs. 1,08,000/- which was recovered from the petitioner on account of penalty. Such action is expected from the Managing Director, North Power Distribution Company Ltd. who will ensure return of Rs. 1,08,000/- to the petitioner. The petitioner may claim interest in accordance with law.
6. With the above observations and directions, the present writ petition is disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J) minu/manish U