AJAY KUMAR TYAGI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused the papers filed along with petition.

(2.) It has been argued by learned Counsel for the petitioner that in view of Sec. 152 of the Electricity Act, 2003 the petitioner compounded the offence with the Electricity Board and in view of sub- Sec. 2(1) of Sec. 152 any person in custody in connection with that offence shall be set at liberty and no proceedings shall be instituted or continued against such consumer or person in any criminal Court and further provided sub-section (3) that after compounding an offence in according with sub-section (1) by the appropriate Government or an officer empowered in this behalf shall be deemed to amount to an acquittal within the meaning of Sec. 300 Crimial P.C. Hence he has already compounded by deposit Rs. 3,00000.00..

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner invited my attention toward Annexure 3 of the affidavit a letter written by Executive Engineer of Electricity Distribution Department First, Saharanpur Sri S.K. Gupta, S.D.O. Second to this effect. He argued that in spite of compound of offence violation of section 152 of the Electricity Act, charge-sheet was submitted in the Court.