Balgovind @ Ramagovind Dwivedi vs M.P.State Electricity Board
2024 Latest Caselaw 4205 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Balgovind @ Ramagovind Dwivedi vs M.P.State Electricity Board on 13 February, 2024

                                                                1
                            IN     THE        HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT JABALPUR
                                                     BEFORE
                                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI
                                                ON THE 13 th OF FEBRUARY, 2024
                                               CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 979 of 2009

                           BETWEEN:-
                           BALGOVIND @ RAMAGOVIND DWIVEDI S/O GOKUL
                           PRASAD DWIVEDI, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, DUARI
                           PS.CHURHATA DI.REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....APPELLANT
                           (BY SHRI PREM NARAYAN VERMA - ADVOCATE AS AMICUS CURIAE )

                           AND
                           1.     M.P.STATE   ELECTRICITY  BOARD       THRO
                                  EXECUTIVE ENGINEER REWA DI.VISION DI.REWA
                                  (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.     STATE OF M.P. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                  (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI MANOJ JHA - PANEL LAWYER )

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

By the present appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the appellant has challenged the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned Special Judge, (Electricity Act) Rewa in Special Case No.01/2006 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 135(1) of Electricity Act, 2003 and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 months with fine of 2800/-, with default stipulation.

2. As none appeared on behalf of the appellant, Shri. Prem Narayan Verma,

Advocate, who is present in the Court, has been requested to assist the Court on behalf of the appellant as amicus curiae.

3. The brief facts in nutshell is that on 14/11/2005, during inspection it was found that appellant is directly using the electricity by passing the meter line in order to avoid its consumption and total 680 watts of the load was found to be attached with the line and he/son was unable to present any bill or document in support of such connection. On that, panchnama was prepared and a complaint was filed before the competent Court. the appellant was prosecuted by the trial Court and upon conclusion of trial, the appellant was held guilty and sentenced as detailed above.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. It is submitted by learned counsel that the incident is of the year 2005 since then the appellant is facing mental agony. It is also submitted that at the time of offence, the appellant was of 42 years of age. The appellant is first offender. Section 135(1) of the Electricity Act, provides that conviction of imprisonment for a term which may be extended to 3 years or with fine or with both. So, sentence of imprisonment is not necessary. The appellant did not remain in custody, he has deposited the entire amount of fine. There was no mens rea behind the incident, so a liberal view on the point of sentence be taken by the Court, and this appeal may be allowed and judgment of the trial Court be quashed.

5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/State supported the judgment and submitted that the prosecution has duly proved the incident and the learned Special Judge has rightly convicted the appellant. He said that the Court is at liberty to consider the case on the point of sentence.

6. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record.

7. Learned trial Judge after considering the statements of the witnesses by judgment dated 02/5/2009 convicted the appellant under Section 135(1) of Electricity Act and sentenced as stated herein above, however, the findings recorded by the learned trial Judge are based on due appreciation of evidence and do not require any interference. The judgment of conviction under Section 135 (1) of Electricity Act is upheld.

8. However, looking to the facts that the incident took place in the year 2005, appellant did not remained in custody. The prosecution has not brought any past criminal antecedent of the appellant on record and there is no minimum sentence has been prescribed under Section 135 of Electricity Act at that time, I deem it proper to reduce the sentence of fine only by setting aside the sentence of imprisonment of three months. Therefore, sentence of imprisonment in aforesaid offence is set aside. Fine amount be returned to him/appellant.

9. The appellant is on bail, his personal bond and bail bond be discharged. Accordingly the appeal is partly allowed.

10. Record of the trial Court be sent back along with copy of the judgment.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI) JUDGE Akm