GORBACHAN SINGH BHAWNANI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (fort short 'Criminal Procedure Code.') have raised a common question of law as to, whether the offences under Sections 39/44 of the Indian Electricity Act (for short 'I.E.Act') read with Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code (for short "Indian Penal Code"), which are non-compoundable, can be permitted to be compounded, by quashing the FTRs., consequent upon payment made by the accused persons of the theft bill amount, after theft was detected and prosecution launched?

(2.) For the purposes of appreciating the controversy, facts of all the cases need not be stated. One case (Crl.M.(M).4107/2000) is being treated as the lead case. The facts of this case, in brief, are as under: On 21/3/1997, Assistant Engineer, DVB lodged a report (FIR), alleging that on 17/3/1997, as per directions of the Superintendent Engineer (Enforcement), joint team consisting of officials from enforcement, theft control, zonal staff of DVB, Police officials conducted surprise raid in Okhla Industrial Area, during the course of raid, following persons/concerns were found stealing electricity directly from the existing main lines of the DVB through PVC wire/two core cables:-

(3.) In October, 2000, petitioner filed the above petition, inter alia, urging that the entire outstanding amount was paid to the DVB as per their office order dated 16/5/1996 and that the FIR and proceedings, therefore, are liable to be quashed. Along with the petition, copies of FIR, challan showing payment of Rs.89,408.81 to DVB and the letter dated 12/5/1997, written by its Executive Engineer to the SHO informing him, that theft bill has been paid by users against whom the FIR was lodged, therefore, DVB is not contemplating any further action against the defaulter. DVB and State have chosen not to file the reply.