KRISHNAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CRL. M. C. No. 402/83 is also filed by P. W. 3 for expunging the adverse remarks made by the learned Magistrate against him is the judgment.

(2.) THE allegations made against the accused in the case can be stated, in brief, as follows: Accused is residing in house bearing municipal No. XVII/17 of the Punalur Municipality. He is electrical consumer no. 3106 of the Punalur Electrical Section. With the intention of committing theft of electrical energy the accused applied artificial means at the service post, which gives connection to his house and also to the main switch installed in his house. By the said arrangement the electrical metre was made unworkable and thereby caused a loss to the tune of Rs. 643. 06 to the Electricity Board for a period of 6 months prior to 6. 9. 1980. Hence the offence.

(3.) WHAT S. 50 of the Act states is that no prosecution shall be instituted except at the instance of the Government or an Electrical inspector or of a person aggrieved by the same. The said provision does not state that no prosecution shall be instituted except by the Government or an electrical Inspector or by a person aggrieved. In other words, the prosecution need not be by the Government or by the Electrical Inspector or by a person aggrieved. The prosecution need only be at the instance of the Government or an electrical Inspector or a person aggrieved. The phrase "at the instance of" merely means "at the solicitation of or at the request of". Therefore the legislative intent is only that a prosecution should not be instituted by some busy body who had nothing to do with the matter. The prosecution should be instituted at the instance of anyone of the three bodies contemplated by the Section.