MOHAMMED GOUSE KHURESHI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Special Judge and Additional District and Sessions Judge at Bidar in Spl.C.C. No. (Electricity) 27/2010, wherein the Trial Court has convicted the accused/appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 135, 138(B) of Electricity Act 2003 r/w. Section 379 of IPC and sentenced him to pay fine of Rs.1,95,720/-, in default, to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of six months and the accused was given set-of under Section 428 of Cr.P.C., 1973.

(2.) I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and also the learned HCGP.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has strenuously contended that the Trial Court has erroneously convicted the accused for the above said offences even in the absence of sufficient evidence on record. The Court has not properly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence on record and not given the benefit of reasonable doubts arising out of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. The Court has also erroneously drawn presumption under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, though the prosecution has not proved the guilt of the accused on facts under Section 135 of the Act, in order to draw such presumption. Further he contended that the sentence passed by the Trial Court is exorbitant, therefore, the judgment and sentence passed by the Trial Court deserves to be set aside.