State of Gujarat vs Fakirbhai Motibhai Sipai

Harsha Devani, J.—Mr. H.K. Patel, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has invited the attention of the court to the impugned judgment and order and more particularly to sub-para (2) of paragraph 18 thereof to point out that it is stated therein that prior to the checking, the old connection of the accused has been disconnected and the arrears were still pending. It has further come on record that at the time when the officers went for checking, in the ledger of the Board, outstanding amounts were reflected. It was pointed out that the aforesaid fact duly establishes that the premises belong to the accused. Under the circumstances, the learned Judge was not justified in holding that the prosecution had not established that the premises in question belong to the accused. It was further submitted that the finding recorded by the learned Judge that the complaint had been filed in contravention of provisions of section 151 of The Electricity Act, 2003 is also erroneous inasmuch as section 151 does not envisage any authorisation in a case where a complaint is lodged by a licensee or the generating company. Having regard to the submissions advanced by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, this court is of the view that the matter requires detailed scrutiny, hence, leave is granted and the application is allowed.