Mohd. Vakil vs Chhattisgarh State Electricity ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 6277 Chatt

                                                                           Page 1 of 3

                                                                               NAFR
                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                 CRA No. 1560 of 2022


 1.   Mohd. Vakil S/o Mohd Vahid, Aged About 50 Years, Resident Of Near
      Ganesh Mandir, Bidpara Raigarh, Police Station City Kotwali, Tahsil And
      District Raigarh (C.G.)
                                                                        ----Appellant
                                                                             (In Bail)
                                         Versus
 1.   Chhattisgarh State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (A Liable
      Company Of Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board), Through The Sub
      Engineer H.S. Rathore (City), Zone 1, Chhattisgarh State Electricity
      Company Limited, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.)

                                                                    ---- Respondent

14/10/2022 Mr. Amit Singh Chouhan, Counsel for the appellant.

Heard on I.A. No. 01 of 2022, application for condonation of delay in filing the instant criminal appeal.

For reasons mentioned in the above application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, the application is allowed and delay of 98 days in filing the criminal appeal is condoned.

Also, heard on admission.

The appeal is admitted for hearing.

Call for record of the Court below.

Issue notice to the respondent, as per rules.

Also, heard on I.A. No. 02/2022, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.

By the impugned judgment dated 31/03/2022 passed by Special Judge (The Electricity Act, 2003) Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) in Special Case No. 342/2018, the appellant stands convicted and sentenced as under:

         Conviction                            Sentence
 Under Section 135 of the R.I. for 2 years.
 Electricity Act, 2003.

Under Section 154(5) of Imposed double amount rate Rs. 2,02,218/- the Electricity Act. of damage amount rate Rs. 1,01,109/-

Counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment is per se illegal and bad in law. There are major contradictions and omissions in the statements of the other witnesses. The appellant was on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty so granted. The disposal of the appeal is likely to take some time, therefore, the appellant be released on bail.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly that appellant has been sentenced with fine only, he was on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty granted to him, the disposal of the appeal is likely to take some time, without expressing anything on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that present is a fit case to suspend the jail sentence imposed upon the appellant and to release him on bail.

Accordingly, the application (I.A. No. 02/2022) is allowed.

It is directed that the execution of substantive jail sentence imposed

upon the appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal on his depositing 50% of the compensation amount i.e. Rs. 1,01,109/- with the concerned Trial Court and he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 06th December, 2022. He shall thereafter appear before the Trial Court on a date to be given by the Registry of this Court and shall continue to appear there on all such subsequent dates as are given to him by the said Court, till disposal of this appeal.

The fine amount, if any, already deposited before concerned Trial Court shall be adjusted accordingly.

List this case for final hearing in its due course.

-Sd/-

(Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge

Chandrakant