PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Vs. ABDUL WAHAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is remanded by the Supreme Court for determination of the question whether the appellant is guilty of an offence under Section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 as the question whether the Chief Engineer, kumbakonam Electric Supply Corporation was the "person aggrieved" had not been determined by this Court.

(2.) SIX persons were tried by the Sub-Magistrate of Papanasam for an offence under Section 379, I. P. C. read with Section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 and Section 44 (c) and (d) of the said Act. All the accused were acquitted by the sub-Magistrate and the State filed an appeal against the order of acquittal. During the hearing of the appeal in this Court, it was submitted that the prosecution of an offence alleged to have been committed by the accused under Section 39 of the indian Electricity Act could not be instituted except at the instance of an "aggrieved person". The question whether dishonest abstraction, consumption or use of electrical energy which was deemed to be theft by virtue of Section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, will amount to an offence against that Act, or one under Section 379, I. P. C. , was referred to a Full Bench. The Full Bench answered the reference as follows-

(3.) THE learned Public Prosecutor at the time of the hearing of the appeal, requested that he may be permitted to adduce additional evidence and mark certain documents. That petition was ordered, as it was felt that in the circumstances of the case, the material documents should be permitted to be marked in evidence and that the Chief Engineer, Kumbakonam Electric Supply corporation should be examined. The Chief Engineer was accordingly examined by this Court and Exs. P. 16 and P. 17 were filed.