Laxminarayan vs Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 16420 MP

                                                            1
                           IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT GWALIOR
                                                      BEFORE
                                         HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV
                                                ON THE 12 th OF DECEMBER, 2022
                                                CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 109 of 2009

                          BETWEEN:-
                          LAXMINARAYAN S/O ASHARAM RAO, AGED ABOUT 55
                          YEARS, OCCUPATION: R/O VILL. GADER, DISTT.GUNA
                          (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                          .....APPELLANT
                          (BY MS. SUDHA SHRIVASTAVA - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          MADHYA      PRADESH      MADHYA     KSHETRA
                          VIDYUTVITIARAN    COMPANY LTD.GUNA     TH:RK
                          BHANDARI           OCCUPATION:        JUNIOR
                          ENGINEER,M.P.V.M.GUNA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....RESPONDENT
                          (BY MR. RAJENDRA BHARGAVA - ADVOCATE WITH MS. PRIYANKA TONK
                          - ADVOCATE)

                                Th is appeal coming on for direction this day, th e court passed the
                          following:
                                                           JUDGMENT

This criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant under section 374 (2) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 13.1.2009 passed by Special Judge (Electricity), District Guna in Special Trial No. 605/2006 convicting the appellant under Section 135- A of the Electricity Act to undergo rigorous imprisonment of six months with fine of Rs.1,000/-.

As per prosecution story, short facts of the case leading to filing of this criminal appeal are that respondent Electricity Board filed a private complaint Signature Not Verified Signed by: ALOK KUMAR Signing time: 13-Dec-22 10:56:57 AM

against the appellant before the trial Court to the effect that appellant has illegally used 1150 watt load of electricity by putting a wire on the LT line. It has also been alleged that the bill amount to Rs.26809/- was also due against the appellant. The respondent after interim calculation given a bill of Rs.2807/- to the appellant but the appellant did not deposit the amount even after notice was issued to him.

The learned trial Court took cognizance vide order dated 14.11.2006 and thereafter, after hearing the rival parties as well as on the basis of material evidence available on record convicted the appellant as mentioned in para 1 of this judgment.

Learned counsel for the accused / appellant argued that the appellant has falsely been implicated in the case. It is further argued that there are omissions and contradictions in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. Independent witness has not supported the case of the complainant / respondent. The whole exercise of the seizure and inspection is doubtful. It is further argued that the appellant is facing the criminal proceedings since 20/04/2005 to till date and is suffering physically and mentally for the same and has already served total incarceration of approximately one month out of total awarded maximum sentence of Six months. On these grounds, it is prayed that the appeal filed by the appellant deserves to be allowed and the judgment of conviction deserves to be set aside.

In alternative, leaned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has already suffered incarceration of approximately one month and the entire fine amount has already been deposited by the appellant, therefore, looking to the nature of offence and the fact that appellant has already served substantive part

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ALOK KUMAR Signing time: 13-Dec-22 10:56:57 AM

of jail sentence, the same may be reduced to the period already undergone.

Learned counsel for respondent argued that after due appreciation of evidence, learned Court below has found the offence proved against the appellant, which requires no interference and prayed that the appeal filed by the appellant be dismissed.

From perusal of the record, this Court is of the view that no illegality has been committed by the learned Court below in convicting the appellant, hence the judgment of conviction passed by the learned Court below requires no interference and the same is hereby maintained.

So far as the period of sentence is concerned, looking to the limited prayer made by the counsel for the appellant and the nature of offence as well as the fact that appellant is facing the criminal proceedings since 2005 and has already served substantive period of jail sentence, the purpose would be served in case the jail sentence awarded to the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone.

In the result, this criminal appeal is partly allowed. The findings of conviction are hereby maintained with the modification to the extent that the jail sentence awarded to the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone subject to depositing fine amount as imposed by the Court below, if not already deposited. Appellant is on bail. His bail bond stands discharged.

With the aforesaid modification, the criminal appeal stands disposed of. Certified copy as per rules.

(SUNITA YADAV) JUDGE AKS

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ALOK KUMAR Signing time: 13-Dec-22 10:56:57 AM