Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. vs Aashish Sahrawat on 27 January, 2011
17. It has been argued on behalf of both the accused by their
respective counsels that premises no. BII, 4 belong to one Meena and
Ramesh from whom the accused were allegedly taking the electricity, but
BSES Vs. Aashish & Anr., CC No. 200/10 Page no. 9 of 13
10
the said suggestion when thrown to PW2 and PW3, was denied by the
said witnesses and they answered that the premises in question was
collectively bearing no. BII, 4 & 5, but there was no distinction in the
premises as it was one unit. The said witnesses specifically deposed that
premises bearing no. 4 & 5, was being occupied by both the accused
Aashish and Gauri and the said witnesses were not having any axe to
grind against the accused so as to falsely deposed against the accused.
Thus, there may not be a municipal number displayed at the premises in
question, but at the same time, both the accused failed to deny the
premises in question as their own while the videography of the same Ex.
CW2/3, was displayed. Hence, the said argument holds no water and is
liable to be rejected outright.