P. DASARATH REDDY, v. THE STATE OF AP REP BY ITS PP HYD.,
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: K.SURENDER
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2024-12-20. P. DASARATH REDDY, v. THE STATE OF AP REP BY ITS PP HYD.,. Read the judgment and case details...
Judgment text
NOTE : The Petitioner/ Accused was directed to be released on bail by the ine ffigh Court OateO 2O-04-2011 in Crl. A. M. P. No7B9 oI 2011 in Crl. A. No. 441 2011. IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURENDER CRIMINA L APPEAL No:441 ot2011 Appeal under Section 374(2) ot Cr. P-C aggrieved by the Judgment 28-03-2011 passed in c. c. No. 1 of 2OO7 on the file of the court of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District-cum-Metropolitan Judge, Cyberabad at L. B. Nagar, Hyderabad. Between: P. Dasarath Reddy, S/o P. Venkat Reddy, Age;40 years, Occ: Business, Chinna Warwal Villige, Ganded Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. ... AppellanUAccused AND The State of A. P. , rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A. P. , at Hyderabad' ... RespondenUComPlainant Counsel for the Appellant: Sri K. R. Sasidharan Nair Counsel for the Respondent: Sri M.
Vivekananda Reddy, Assistant Public Prosecutor The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURENDER CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 441 OF 2011 JUDGMENT: 1. The Criminal appeal is filed by the appeliant-accused questioning the Judgment dated 28. O3. 2OL1 in C. C. No. 1 of 2OO7 passed by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District-Cum-Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad at L. B. Nagar, Hyderabad, wherein the accused was convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 135 and 138 of the Indian Electricity Act (for short "the Act") and sentenced to undergo Rigorous. imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay fine of Rs. 5,0O0/-, in default to suffer Simple Imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 135 of the Act. I Further, the accused sentenced to undergo Rigorous I Imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.
2,OOO/-, in default to suffer Simple Imprisonment for a period of two months for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act. 2. Heard Sri K. R. Sasidharan Nair, learned counsel for the appellant-accused and Sri M. Vivekananda Reddy, 2 KS,J Crl. A. No. 44l of 201I learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent- State and perused the record. 3. On 25. O4. 20OI, the vigilance personnei of the Electricity Department, went to the pr'emises of the appellant where pilferage of ener$/ was committed and found that electricity connection stood in the name of late Sri P. Venkat Reddy, who is father of the appellant and the appellant was indulging in pilferage of ener5/ by directly tapping the electrical power whiie the service was under disconnection. Though the electricity meter stood in the name of late Sri P. Venkat Reddy, the appellqnt was prosecuted for pilferage of electricitlr ener5/ as it was committed by him. PW.
1 prepared the Inspection notes about the incriminating material and also obtained the signature of the appellant on it. Thereafter, a complaint was filed and the appellant was charged for the offence punishable under Sections 135 and 138 of the Act. 4. Learned Sessions Judge having examined the witnesses i. e. , PWs. l to 6 and also documents i. e. , Exs. P. 1 to P. 6, found favour with the conversion of PW. 1 that there I . -. --t 3 KS,J Crl. A. No. 411 of 201I pilferage of electricity resulting in loss of Rs. 1,85,760/- .. yas to the Electricity department. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that electricit5r meter was standing in the name of father of the appellant i. e. , late Sri P. Venkat Reddy, as such he ought to have been the main accused. Alternatively, the leamed counsel also submitted that the offence is compoundable offence and further the appellant is now bedridden with heart disease. 6.
For better appreciation of the facts of the case, it is relevant to extract Section 135(e)(ii) which reads as follows: Section 13 5. 'I'heft of electricitv: (e) uhoeuer, dishonestlg uses electricitg for tlrc purpose <tther than for which the usage of electicittl was authoised, so as to abstroct or consume or use electicitg shall be punishabte with imprisonment for a term uthich maA ertend to three Aears or with fine or uith both: (ii) exceeds 1O kilowatt, the imposed fine on first conuictiorL shall not be less than three times the gain financial on account of such thefi of etecticitg and in the euent of second or subsequent conuiction, the sentence shall be imprisonment for a term not less than sir months, but which mag ertend to fiue gears and tuith not less fine than six times the gain fi. nancial. on account of such thefi of electicity: Prouided . further that in the euent of second. and. subsequent conuiction of a person u. there the load.
abstracterl, consumed, or used or attempted. abstraction or attempted consumption or attempted. 4 KS,J Crl. A. No. 44l of 201 I - use exceeds 1O kilotuatt, such person shall also be debarred getting ang supplg of electricitg a from for period tuhich shall not be less than three montls but mag extend to tLUo gears and shall also be debaned gettirLg supplg of electricitg that period from for from ang other source or generating station: Prouided also that if it is proued that ang artificial means or means not author6ed bg the -Board or licensee or supplier, as the case mag be, exist the for abstraction, consumption or use of electicitg bg the consumer, it shall be presumed, until the contrary is proued, that ang abstraction, consumption or use of electricitg has been dishonestly caused bg such consumer. 7 . Having gone through the record, there is no infirmity in the finding of the learned Sessions Judge.
However, l keeping in view of the age of the appellant and the undertaking of the appellant to pay a fine amount in accordaace with Section 135(e)(ii) of the Act, this Court deems it appropriate to order as follows: I' I Insofar as offence under Section 135 of the Act is concerned, since the loss was assessed as Rs. i,85,760/- and the electricit5r consumption exceeds 1O kilowatts and there are no other convictions against the appellant, the appellant is liable to pay three times of financial gain on account of loss occurred due to his pilferage of electricit5r ener5/ i. e. , Rs. 5,57,280/- I 5 KS,J Crl. A. No. 44l of20l1 (Rs. 1,85,760 3l within l- x eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which, the appellant shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of one (01) year.
Further, the sentence and conviction I imposecl against the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act is hereby set aside while maintaining the fine ; amount of Rs. 2,O0O/-. ,. ' l B. Accordinglv, this Criminal Appeal is partly allowed. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand e1-osed Sd/. C. V. MALLIKARJUNA VARMA JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// \ ECTION OFFIGER To, 1. The I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District-cum- Metropolitan Sessions Judge; Cyberabad at L. B. Nagar, Hyderabad. (with records, if any) 2. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] 3. One CC to Sri K. R Sasidharan Nair, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies kam/gh +* HIGH COURT DATED:2011212024 1 hE. S14 . e . .. JUDGMENT ) )- 3 1S lif, ? i? 5 I I CRLA. No. 441 of 2011 i 't,'. Y:'')/ ;;:-- l THE CRIMINAL APPEAL ! S PARTLY ALLOWED @ W
Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.