PUNNARA VEETTIL ACHUTHAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are accused 1 to 10 in a prosecution, inter alia, under Sec.135(1)(a) of the Indian Electricity Act. Cognizance has been taken by the learned Magistrate against the petitioners for the offences punishable, inter alia, under Sec.135(1)(a) of the Indian Electricity Act and Secs.143, 147 and 353 read with Sec.149 of the IPC.

(2.) The crux of the contentions of the petitioners is that cognizance of the offence punishable under Sec.135(1)(a) of the Indian Electricity Act is legally unsustainable and void inasmuch as the complaint has not been filed by the specified officer. The learned counsel for the petitioners relies on the decision of this Court in Crl.M.C.No.2910/05 dated 10/11/2006.

(3.) I find force in the submission that the cognizance of the offence under Sec.135(1)(a) of the Indian Electricity Act is not justified. Of course, it is for the learned Magistrate to consider and pass appropriate orders regarding framing of charges. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in so far as the 1st petitioner is concerned, there is no allegation of having committed any other offence also. Of course, the final report does not make that position very clear. I am satisfied, in these circumstances, that the petitioners can be permitted to raise all their contentions at the stage of Sec.239/240 of the Cr.P.C. I find force in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the 1st petitioner may be permitted to appear through counsel till the court takes a decision on the question of framing charge.