LAWS(GJH)-2022-7-829

STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. PRATAPBHAI PREMJI GOHEL

Decided On July 18, 2022
STATE OF GUJARAT Appellant
V/S
Pratapbhai Premji Gohel Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and order passed in Special (Electricity Act) No. 9 of 2012, by the learned Special Judge (GEB) and District and Sessions Judge, Porbandar, dtd. 22/10/2013, recording acquittal of the Respondent - Original Accused - Pratapbhai Premji Gohel, who was charged with the offence punishable under Ss. 135 and 138 of The Indian Electricity Act 2003 (hereinafter referred to as "the Electricity Act ").

(2.) The facts of the case briefly as summarized are that the Accused viz. Pratapbhai Premjibhai Gohil, was running one ice factory namely Jay Ambe Ice Factory and has obtained commercial electricity connection of Gujarat Electricity Board being Customer No. 85901/00847/8. That on 13/5/2011, while the inspection was carried at the factory of the accused, it was found that, in the electric meter, the accused, with the help of other person, connected external devise and because of that, the meter could not move properly. Thereby, the accused disturbed the reading parameter by connecting external device and has committed theft of electric energy amounting to Rs.2,37,611.09. Hence, a complaint came to be lodged with Rajkot GEB Police Station, Rajkot, under the Electricity Act . On registering the offence against the accused, Investigating agency recorded the statements of the concerned members of the squad and on completing the investigation, found the present accused has committed the theft of electric supply.

(3.) On the basis of the said complaint, after thorough investigation as there was sufficient evidence against the present Respondent - Accused, charge sheet was filed against him. However, as the case was sessions triable by the learned Special Judge, hence, the same was registered as Special (GEB) Case No. 9 of 2012. Thereafter, charge was framed against the accused for the offences punishable under Ss. 135 and 138 of the Electricity Act. The Respondent - Accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. The prosecution has thereafter laid evidence. The prosecution has examined as many as 11 witnesses as well as produced number of doucmentary evidences on record of the case. At the conclusion of the trial, the learned Special Judge (GEB) and District and Sessions Judge, Porbandar, was pleased to acquit the Respondent - Accused from the offences punishable under Sec. 135 and 138 of the Electricity Act.