AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Bakhshish Kaur, J.
Reply filed is taken on record.
Heard.
The case against the petitioner was registered under Section 379, IPC and under section 39 of the Electricity Act, for theft of electric energy.
As per demand notice, Annexure P2 dated 22.11.98 the petitioner was required to rectify the malpractice within 48 hours on receipt of the notice, failing which the electric supply shall be disconnected. He was required to deposit at least 50% of the amount of compensation.
Accordingly, the petitioner has deposited 50% of the amount on the next date i.e. November 26, 1998, vide Annexure P4 and the remaining amount on June 14, 1999 vide Annexure P5.
Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has deposited the amount of electricity charges consumed, no useful purpose would be served by allowing the criminal proceedings to continue, in view of the reported decision in Hem Raj Anand v. State of Haryana, 1999(1) RCR 103 . In these premises, this petition is accepted and the F.I.R. No. 535 dated 25.11.1988, under section 379, IPC and section 39 of the Electricity Act, P.S. Chandni Bagh, Panipat, and the subsequent proceedings arising out therefrom are hereby quashed.