Allahabad High Court
Sabir Ali vs The State Of U.P. Thru. The Secy. Home ... on 16 February, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH AFR Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:13837 Court No. - 27 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1140 of 2024 Applicant :- Sabir Ali Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. The Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Dilip Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Aprajita Bansal Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. Heard Sri D.K. Shukla, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Akhilesh Kumar Vyas, the learned AGA-I for the State, Sri Jayant Mohan Verma holding brief of Mrs. Aprajita Bansal, the learned counsel for the opposite party no. 3.
2. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant has sought quashing of the impugned charge sheet dated 13.04.2023 filed against the applicant arising out of Case Crime No. 797 of 2020, under Section 135 of Indian Electricity Act, 2003, Police Station Anti-power Theft, District Unnao, pending in the court of Additional District Judge-4, E.C. Act, Unnao in S.T. No. 1127 of 2023 as well as for setting aside the impugned order dated 20.09.2022 by which cognizance has been taken by the Additional District Judge-4, E.C. Act, Unnao in Case Crime No. 797 of 2020, under Section 135 Indian Electricity Act, 2003, Police Station Anti-Power Theft, District Unnao in S.T. No. 1127 of 2023.
3. In the FIR lodged on 06.07.2020 it was alleged that when a team of engineers and officials of Madhyanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited had checked the premises of the applicant, it was found that he had cut the service cable and was consuming electricity by bypassing the meter installed at his premises, which was an offence under Section 135 of the Electricity Act.
4. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that The applicant had filed Writ Petition No. 21799 (M/B) of 2020, which was disposed of by means of an order dated 23.11.2020 by observing that the applicant is entitled to get benefit of the provisions contained under Section 41(1) Cr.P.C. During investigation, the Investigating Officer has recorded that the officials of Madhyanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited did not provide a CD or other device containing videography record of the testing.
5. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the meter that was installed on the premises of the applicant has not been tested so as to ascertain any tempering etc. made by the applicant on it.
6. Section 135 of the Electricity Act provides that whoever dishonestly damages any wire or causes it to be damaged so as to interfere with the proper or accurate metering of electricity, shall be guilty of committing theft of electricity.
7. The learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon a judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited v. Poonam Vashisth, 2008 SCC OnLine P&H 1515, wherein it was held that the rules require that to prove the theft of electricity it was the basic requirement that the meter must have been checked from the concerned laboratory.
8. Section 135(1)(c) of the Electricity Act, 2003 provides as follows:-
"135. Theft of Electricity.-
(1)Whoever, dishonestly,-
* * *
(c) damages or destroys an electric meter, apparatus, equipment, or wire or causes or allows any of them to be so damaged or destroyed as to interfere with the proper or accurate metering of electricity; or"
9. A bare perusal of the provisions contained in 135(1)(c) of the Electricity Act indicates that an offence of theft of electricity is made out when the service cable is cut so as to draw electricity and in such a contingency, there is no need of any tempering having been made with the meter. Therefore, where the allegations are such as have been levelled in the present case, there is absolutely no need for checking of the meter. The 'rules referred to in the judgment in Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited, might have been different in that state, which are not applicable in the state of U.P.
10. The learned counsel for the applicant has next relied upon the judgment of the Orissa High Court in K. Sundaram v. S.P. Rajmanikam & Anr. 1987 CrL.J.247. This case arose from a judgment of acquittal passed after conclusion of the trial, after assessment of the evidence led by the parties. In the present case, that stage is yet to reach.
11. So far as submission regarding non furnishing of the compact disc or other device containing videography of the incident is concerned, that would be a factor to be taken into consideration by the trial court while evaluating evidence by the parties. For taking cognizance of the offence and summoning the accused to face the trial, only this much is sufficient that the FIR discloses commission of offence and the FIR allegations are supported by the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Therefore, the mere non furnishing of proof of videography will not give rise to a ground for quashing of the proceedings without holding a trial.
12. In State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal : 1992 SCC (Crl) 426, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that "the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases; that the court will not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the court to act according to its whim or caprice."
13. The aforesaid law has been reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.B.I. v. Aryan Singh, 2023 SCC Online SC 379, wherein it has been held that while exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court is not required to conduct a mini trial. It does not require the prosecution/investigating agency to prove the allegations. While exercising the powers under Section 482 of the CrPC the Court has very limited jurisdiction and is required to consider "whether any sufficient material available to proceed further against the accused for which the accused is required to be tried or not".
14. When I examined the facts of the present case in light of the aforesaid law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is apparent that the applicant is held guilty of committing theft of electricity by damaging the service line coming to his premises, which is sufficient for trial of an offence under Section 135 of the Electricity Act. While deciding the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court has only to see whether on the basis of prosecution allegations, a case for trial of the accused is made out or not and the Court cannot examine defence of the accused at this stage.
15. The application lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 16.2.2024 Pradeep/-