INDERJEET Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has impugned the judgment and order on sentence dated 17.09.2012 and 26.09.2012 respectively wherein the appellant Inderjeet stood convicted under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003. He had been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of one year and to pay a fine of ??37,99,314/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for a period of six months. The civil liability computed under Section 154 (5) of the Act had worked out to ??25,32,876/- which was payable with simple interest @ 6% per annum. During the course of this appeal, the appellant had died. His legal heirs i.e. his widow and son are brought on record. They are contesting the appeal.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that respondent No. 2 had filed a complaint dated 06.08.2008 alleging that the appellant was guilty of theft of electricity; this was pursuant to an inspection carried out by the joint inspection team of respondent No. 2 which was dated 22.11.2007. This joint inspection had been conducted at premises No. 615, khasra No.126, Saini Mohalla, Bhootonwali Gali, Nangloi which was besides premises No. 621-A of the same locality. In the aforenoted premises (615), a connected load of 83.42 KW was found being used for non-domestic purposes; this meter installed at the premises was found to be fake. Inspection report, seizure memo and meter details report was prepared at the spot. The appellant was asked to sign but he refused.

(3.) The prosecution examined five witnesses of whom the star witnesses were PW-1, PW-3 and PW-4. They were the members of joint inspection team. PW-3 & PW-4 had identified the appellant at the spot. The appellant was also served of the summons dated 04.03.2010 at the same address substantiating the submission of the complainant that the appellant was the owner, occupier, user and had a direct link with the premises where the disputed meter was found installed. No documents/papers were however produced before the Court to prove the ownership of the appellant.