Lala Ram vs The State Nct Of Delhi & Anr.
2014 Latest Caselaw 3327 Del

$~12
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                        Date of decision: 24th July, 2014

+                           CRL.A. 1109/2013

    LALA RAM                                               ..... Appellant
                            Through:    Ms. Sunita Arora, Advocate for Mr.
                                        Krishan Kumar, Advocate

                            versus

    THE STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR.              ..... Respondents

Through: Mr. M.N. Dudeja, APP Mr. Abhay Kumar, Advocate for R-2/ TPDDL % CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA

: SUNITA GUPTA, J. (Open Court)

1. The appellant Lala Ram has preferred the present appeal

against the judgment dated 19th October, 2006 passed by the

learned Additional Sessions Judge, Special Electricity Court,

Rohini, Delhi in Complaint Case No.144/2006 by which he was

convicted under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and was

sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three

months. As per the provisions of Section 154 (v), liability of

Rs.50,000/- was fixed on account of loss suffered by the

complainant company due to act of the convict.

2. The allegations against the appellant were that the appellant

was running an atta chakki on the ground floor of premises K-170,

Vijay Vihar, Phase II, Delhi. On 28th August, 2004, premises was

inspected by a raiding party and accused was found using the

electricity supply directly by passing the meter installed under

single point delivery contractor by connecting wires from his load

to NDPL LV main. As such, he was found committing theft of

electricity directly by getting this supply from NDPL LV main.

3. During the course of hearing of the appeal, it was reported

that the matter has since been settled before Continuous Lok

Adalat-II vide its order dated 6th March, 2013. The appellant had

already deposited a sum of Rs.25000/- and offered to pay

Rs.15000/- with the respondent company and it is submitted that

the amount of Rs.15,000/- was subsequently deposited. Counsel

for respondent No.2 has no objection to dispose of the appeal in

view of the order dated 6th March, 2013.

4. Since the matter has been finally settled/compounded

between the parties before the Continuous Lok Adalat vide order

dated 6th March, 2013, which is on record, the appeal filed by the

appellant against the impugned judgment stands

settled/compounded.

5. In view of the statement made by the counsel for the

respondent, the appeal is accepted in terms of settlement. Since the

offence stands compounded, the appellant is acquitted of the

charge.

The appeal stands disposed of.

Trial Court record be sent back.

(SUNITA GUPTA) JUDGE JULY 24, 2014/rs