STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. SHANABHAI BHAIJIBHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) * * * *

(2.) So far as section 50 of the Indian Electricity Act 1910 is concerned it does not require any sanction from any authority but it only says that no prosecution shall be instituted against any person for any offence against the said Act or any rule licence or order thereunder except at the instance of Government or an Electrical Inspector or of a person aggrieved by the same. In the pesent case the supplier is the Gujarat Electricity Board and hence it can be said that the Gujarat Electricity Board is aggrieved by the act of the accused. Hence the prosecution has to be instituted at the instance of the Gujarat Electricity Board. Now the Gujarat Electricity Board acts through its officers. The Deputy Engineer Gujarat Electricity Board ai Dabhoi filed a complaint at the Dabhoi Police Station in connection with this offence. though of course against Chunibhai Nathubhai in whose name the electrical connection was taken. It is stated fin the complaint that the said complaint is filed on behalf of the Gujarat Electricity Board as required by section 50 of the Electricity Act. That complaint is at Ex. 35 on the record of the trial Court. Ex. 25 shows that the Executive Engineer of the Gujarat Electricity Board accorded post-facto approval to the act of the Deputy Engineer. Ex. 25 refers to Conduct of Legal Affairs booklet in this connection The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has placed in my hands the booklet published by the Gujarat Electricity Board which is entitled The Conduct of Legal Affairs (Procedure) Regulation 1961. The said Regulation has been made in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (k) of section 79 of the Electricity (Supply) Act 1948 Chapter II of the said Regulation deals with delegation of powers. Regulation 5 which is in Chapter 11 reads as follows :-

(3.) It appears that the Deputy Engineer who was authorised to file the complaint before police this being a cognizable offence filed complaint before the police and obtained post-facto sanction from the Executive Engineer. Looking to the provisions of Regulation 5 which are reproduced above it is clear that there was compliance with the provisions of section 50 of the Indian Electricity Act in the present case in that the Deputy Engineer to whom the powers were delegated filed the complaint before the police and obtained post-facto approval from the Executive Engineer. It is not that the Deputy Engineer was not empowered to file the complaint. The provisions show that he had ordinarily to take approval of the Divisional Officer first and then take action but in urgent matters a Deputy Engineer can take action as may be warranted by the circumstances of the case and the approval of the Divisional Officer could be obtained later on. The Deputy Engineer in the present case thus being a person authorised to file the complaint and he having filed the complaint before the police it is clear that there was compliance with section 50 in the present case. In view of this the learned advocate Mr. D. F. Amin for the respondent-accused was unable to support the conclusion reached by the learned Judicial Magistrate that there was no compliance with section 50 of the Electricity Act in the present case. It is crystal clear from the above discussion that the complaint was filed by a competent officer authorised by the Gujarat Electricity Board the aggrieved institution which could set the law in motion as per section 50 of the Electricity Act.