Delhi District Court
State vs Sudhir on 9 November, 2012
1
IN THE COURT OF SHRI NAROTTAM KAUSHAL, ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE,
THE SPECIAL COURT UNDER THE ELECTRICITY ACT 2003
SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
FIR No. : 112/12
PS : Fatehpur Beri, New Delhi
U/S : 135 of Electricity Act, 2003
State Vs Sudhir
a Name of the complainant : Sh.Ravinder Kumar - Senior Manager
(Enforcement, BSES Rajdhani
Power Ltd., Andrews Ganj, N.D)
c Date of commission of : 21.03.2012
Offence
d Name of the accused : Sudhir
at House near Pole No.SKT A 257, Village
Fatehpur Beri, New Delhi74
c Offence complained of : 135 of Electricity Act, 2003
d Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
e Order pronounced on : 09.11.2012
ORDER
1 Accused Sudhir has been charge sheeted by PSFatehpur Beri for the offence punishable u/sec.135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter called as 'the Act') 2.1 FIR Ex.PW1/F has been lodged on a written complaint made by Ravindra Kumar - Sr. Manager, BRPL. It is the case of the complainant that a team of its officers inspected at House near Pole No.SKT A 257, Village Fatehpur Beri, New Delhi74 on 21.03.2012, which was used and occupied by accused Sudhir. At the time of inspection, the inspection team found that there State Vs. Sudhir Page 1 of 3 2 was no meter at site and accused was indulged in direct theft of electricity directly from BESS LV mains, with the help of aluminium wire. Connected load was assessed at 1.4 KW for domestic use. Inspection report, load report and seizure memo were prepared. Videography of the inspection was carried out. A theft bill of Rs.20,616/ was raised. On failure of the accused to pay the theft bill, complaint was made to the PS - Fatehpur Beri for registration of FIR.
2.2 On the basis of complaint aforesaid, FIR bearing no.112/12 Ex.PW1/F was registered and after investigation Chalan was submitted.
3 As per provisions of section 154 (3) of the Act, procedure for summary trial was adopted.
4 Notice of accusation was framed against the accused. He pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. He, however, further stated that he had paid the entire theft bill and the complainant company had issued a no dues certificate to him.
5 Prosecution in support of its case, examined complainant Ravindra Kumar, BRPL (PW1). PW1 proved the inspection and the documents prepared at the site. He also proved his complaint & the FIR lodged on the basis of his complaint. During crossexamination, no dues certificate issued by the complainant company was confronted to the witness. He admitted the genuineness and issuance of said certificate. Remaining prosecution evidence was closed by order of the court. For ready reference order closing prosecution evidence is reproduced herein below: "PW1 examined, crossexamined & discharged. It is noticed that PW1, who is the Authorized Officer of the complainant company, in his crossexamination has admitted issuance of no dues certificate.
At this stage, proxy counsel for the accused has submitted that no useful purpose shall be served by recording the evidence of remaining witnesses, when the complainant itself has issued a no dues certificate to the accused.
State Vs. Sudhir Page 2 of 3 3I have heard the proxy counsel for the accused & find force in his arguments.
Prosecution in the present case has been instituted on a complaint filed by BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd., through its authorised officer Ravindra Kumar - Sr. Manager, for the reason that its theft bill amounting to Rs. 20,615/ had not been paid by accused Sudhir. Now, that the entire theft bill has been paid by the accused and no dues certificate issued by the complainant, the cause of action for filing the complaint does not exist any more. Proceeding with the trial and recording the testimonies of the PWs shall only result in futile exercise involving wastage of court time as well as time of public functionaries who were associated in inspection & investigation. I, therefore, find this is an appropriate case where powers u/sec.258 Cr.P.C. can be exercised and prosecution case can be closed.
Ordered accordingly. Proceedings in the case are stopped, which shall have the effect of acquittal of the accused. "
6 The accused having paid the entire claim made by the complainant in its theft bill, no useful purpose shall be served by continuing with the trial. It is accepted practice in private complaints filed by the complainant company that matters are settled and complaints are withdrawn on the accused paying up of the bill as per the settlement arrived at. In the present case, accused has paid the entire theft bill, leaving no cause of action for the complainant to pursue the complaint. Its claim has been fully satisfied by the accused. Continuing with the trial will only amount to wastage of court time and harassment of the accused. Exercising power u/sec.258 Cr.P.C., the proceedings are stopped without pronouncing any judgment. This shall have the effect of acquittal of the accused. Personal bond & surety bond of the accused is canceled and surety is discharged.
File be consigned to Record room.
Announced in the open (NAROTTAM KAUSHAL)
court on 09.11.2012 ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE
SPL. ELECTRICITY COURT
SAKET COURTS NEW DELHI
State Vs. Sudhir Page 3 of 3
4
SC No.4/12
FIR No.112/12
09112012
Present Sh.Inder Kumar, ld. Addl. PP for the State
AR with Sh.S.K.Alok, proxy counsel for
Sh.Rishab Raj Jain, counsel for the complainant
Accused persons on bail with
Sh.A.A.Khan, counsel for the accused
PW1 examined, crossexamined & discharged. It is noticed that
PW1, who is the Authorized Officer of the complainant company, in his cross examination has admitted issuance of no dues certificate.
At this stage, proxy counsel for the accused has submitted that no useful purpose shall be served by recording the evidence of remaining witnesses, when the complainant itself has issued a no dues certificate to the accused.
I have heard the proxy counsel for the accused & find force in his arguments.
Prosecution in the present case has been instituted on a complaint filed by BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd., through its authorised officer Ravindra Kumar - Sr. Manager, for the reason that its theft bill amounting to Rs. 20,615/ had not been paid by accused Sudhir. Now, that the entire theft bill has been paid by the accused and no dues certificate issued by the complainant, the cause of action for filing the complaint does not exist any more. Proceeding with the trial and recording the testimonies of the PWs shall only result in futile exercise involving wastage of court time as well as time of public functionaries who were associated in inspection & investigation. I, therefore, find this is an appropriate case where powers u/sec.258 Cr.P.C. can be exercised and prosecution case can be closed.
Ordered accordingly. Proceedings in the case are stopped, which shall have the effect of acquittal of the accused.
Bail bonds are cancelled and surety is discharged.
File be consigned to record room.
( NAROTTAM KAUSHAL ) ASJ/SPL.COURT(ELECT.)SOUTH SAKET COURTS/09112012 State Vs. Sudhir Page 4 of 3