Ramniwas vs M.P.Madhya Kshetra Vidhyut ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 9460 MP

                                                             1
                           IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                 AT GWALIOR
                                                    BEFORE
                                 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
                                                 ON THE 23 rd OF JUNE, 2023
                                            CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1056 of 2011

                          BETWEEN:-
                          RAMNIWAS S/O LAXMAN PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 30
                          YEARS,  RESIDENT    OF GRAM NETUAPURA, P.S.
                          INDERGARH, DISTRICT DATIA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....APPELLANT
                          (SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR PACHAURI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
                          APPLICANT)

                          AND
                          M.P.MADHYA KSHETRA VIDHYUT VITRAN CO.LTD.
                          TH:ASSTT. ENGINEER INDERGARH, DISTRICT DATIA
                          (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....RESPONDENT
                          (SHRI RAJENDRA BHARGAV- LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
                          RESPONDENT- MPEB)

                                Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
                          following:
                                                              ORDER

Present Criminal Appeal is listed today after restoration of its original number vide order dated 16th of June, 2023 passed in MCRC No.24812 of 2023 as the same was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 10th of April, 2023 in the absence of appellant's counsel.

Appellant Ramniwas has preferred this criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of CrPC challenging judgment dated 20th of December, 2011 passed by Special Judge (Electricity Act), District Datia in Special Case No.38 of 2010 whereby appellant has been convicted under Section 138(1)(b) of Indian Signature Not Verified Signed by: MAHENDRA BARIK Signing time: 6/26/2023 6:52:04 PM

Electricity Act and sentenced to undergo six months imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- with default stipulation.

Prosecution case, in brief is that an irrigation pump installed in the name of the consumer was inspected by Junior Engineer of electric connection number of accused bearing connection no. 99-20-14300 and electricity connection was disconnected due to outstanding amount of Rs.64,116/- to Electricity Department, whose information was provided to accused on 19-10- 2009. On 30-10-2009 at 09:45 am a surprise inspection of accused irrigation pump located at village Netuapura was done in the presence of lineman Vidyaram. Then, illegal use of electricity was found in the premises of accused.

Panchnama of illegal electricity theft was made on the spot and signatures of witnesses were taken. The accused was informed to give his reply regarding settlement bill amounting to Rs.64,116/- within seven days and after that, complaint was filed under Section 138(1)(b) of Indian Electricity Act. Charges against accused under Section 138(1)(b) of Indian Electricity Act was filed and accused denied the charges and claimed trial and in the written statement recorded under Section 313 of CrPC, the accused himself pleaded to be innocent and Mohan Singh was examined as DW. After conclusion of trial, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant vide impugned judgment. Hence, this appeal.

It is contended by counsel for the appellant that the trial Court has committed an error in convicting and sentencing the appellant without going through evidence properly. Prosecution witness J. K. Shrivastava (PW1) in his Court statement has specifically deposed that on 19-10-2009 he was working on the post of Junior Engineer and on the said date, he along with lineman

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MAHENDRA BARIK Signing time: 6/26/2023 6:52:04 PM

Vidhyaram Nawab Singh disconnected connection no.99-20-14300 due to outstanding amount of Rs.64,116/- which was in name of one Dwarikaprasad and this witness did not find to have electricity connection with the name of appellant Ramnivas. It is further contended that notice Ex.P4 was given to one Pankaj Sharma and the same was not received by appellant. It is further submitted that although electricity connection was not in the name of appellant, but the appellant was bound to deposit outstanding amount of electric bill with the electricity Department. The appellant is a vehicle driver and neither said connection was in the name of the appellant nor there is any evidence on record regarding relationship between appellant and Dwarikaprasad and the said connection is in the name of Dwarikaprasad for which the appellant cannot be held guilty for said connection, ignoring the sad fact the judgment passed by trial Court is prima facie liable to be quashed and the appellant is liable to be acquitted of charge levelled against him.

On the other hand, counsel for the respondent opposed the contentions of appellant and prayed for dismissal of this appeal.

After having heard learned counsel for the parties and on going through information regarding disconnection of electricity, notice Ex.P4 and other documents as well as evidence available on record, it is evident that said electric connection was in the name of Dwarikaprasad and there is no evidence on

record regarding the relationship between appellant and Dwarikaprasad. Only on the basis of oral evidence, the trial Court has wrongly convicted the appellant and sentenced him for commission of alleged offence.

Accordingly, the appeal deserves to be and is hereby allowed. The judgment dated 20th of December, 2011 passed by Special Judge (Electricity Act) District Datia in Special Case No. 38 of 2010 is hereby set aside. The Signature Not Verified Signed by: MAHENDRA BARIK Signing time: 6/26/2023 6:52:04 PM

appellant is acquitted of charge under Section 138(1)(b) of the Indian Electricity Act. If the appellant is on bail, his bail bonds and surety bonds stand discharged. The fine amount, if any, deposited by appellant before trial Court as well as the electricity amount, if any, deposited by appellant with Electricity Department, be refunded to him.

A copy of this judgment be sent to the Trial Court as well as copy of the same be supplied to the respondent- MPEB for information and compliance.

(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL) JUDGE MKB

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MAHENDRA BARIK Signing time: 6/26/2023 6:52:04 PM