Sandeep Shokeen vs The State Nct Of Delhi & Anr
2017 Latest Caselaw 4684 Del

$~25

*        IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+        W.P.(CRL) 2290/2017

         SANDEEP SHOKEEN                                  ..... Petitioner
                           Through Mr. Rohit Kumar, Advocate with
                           petitioner in person.
                           versus
         THE STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR                     ..... Respondents
                           Through Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, ASC for the State
                           Mr. Sunil Fernades, Standing counsel for BSES
                           RPL with Mr. Arnav Vidyarthi with Mr. Pradeep
                           Baisoya, authorised representative of respondent
                           No.2-comapny.

         CORAM:
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL

                           ORDER

% 01.09.2017

1. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has handed over a copy of General Power of Attorney dated 05.07.2017 in favour of Mr. Pradeep Baisoya. Same is taken on record.

2. The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the FIR bearing No.559/2014, registered on 26.06.2014 against him with Police Station Najafgarh, South West District, Delhi, under Section 135 of the Indian Electricity (Amendment) Act, 2003 on the complaint of respondent No.2/BSES.

3. The raid on the premises of the petitioner was conducted on 26.03.2014 and he was found indulging in direct theft of electricity. The respondent no. 2/BSES lodged a complaint which culminated into said FIR against the petitioner.

4. Later on, the respondent No.2 raised a bill of Rs.2,26,587.24 against the petitioner bearing No.HNENR110420140015A0 dated 11.04.2014 for new CA No. 400526023. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 submits that this bill of Rs.2,26,588/- is inclusive of penalty charges of Rs.79,287.24. He submits that since the matter has been amicably settled with the petitioner, they have not claimed penalty charges of Rs.79,287.24. He submits that they have received the entire settlement amount of Rs.1,47,300/- from the petitioner. On deposit of dues, the respondent No.2-company had issued a "No Dues Certificate" to the petitioner.

5. The authorised representative of the respondent No.2 submits that since the entire settlement amount had been received by them from the petitioner, they do not want to pursue the said FIR. He submits that the said FIR may be quashed.

6. In the circumstances, when the parties have amicably settled the matter and the petitioner had paid the bill raised by the respondent, no fruitful purpose would be served in further pursuing the said FIR. Hence, to secure ends of justice, the FIR bearing No.559/2014, registered on 26.06.2014 against the petitioner with Police Station Najafgarh, South West District, Delhi, under Section 135 of the Indian Electricity (Amendment) Act, 2003 and proceedings arising out of the said FIR are hereby quashed.

7. The petition is disposed of accordingly.

8. DASTI.

VINOD GOEL, J.

SEPTEMBER 01, 2017 "sandeep"