Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Aniruddhsinh Mahipatsinh on 15 February, 2013
Author: Harsha Devani
Bench: Harsha Devani
STATE OF GUJARAT....Appellant(s)V/SANIRUDDHSINH MAHIPATSINH WALA....Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) R/CR.A/1690/2012 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1690 of 2012 ============================================= STATE OF GUJARAT....Appellant(s) Versus ANIRUDDHSINH MAHIPATSINH WALA....Respondent(s) ============================================= Appearance: MR HK PATEL, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Appellant ============================================= CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI Date : 15/02/2013 ORAL ORDER
1. Mr. H.K. Patel, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the appellant has drawn the attention of the court to a decision of this court in the case of Gopal Chandubhai Rana vs. State of Gujarat, 2008 (3) GLR 2026, wherein this court has held that the procedure under sections 99 to 101 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is not required to be followed by an officer of the Electricity Board detecting the offence; not following the procedure under sections 99 to 101 of the Code is an irregularity; the prosecution case, if it is otherwise credible, cannot be thrown out on the ground of irregularity; that in respect of an offence of theft of electricity, the delay in lodging the complaint is not fatal to the prosecution case; and that Rojkam by the officer detecting the offence is admissible in evidence, as it is not a statement before the police. It is submitted that the reasoning given by the learned Judge is contrary to the principles laid down by this Court in the above-referred judgment.
2. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the appeal is admitted. Bailable warrant in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) be issued against the respondent.
( Harsha Devani, J. ) hki Page 2 of 2