STATE OF M P Vs. RAMCHARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant/state has preferred this appeal under Section 378 of cr. P. C. against the judgment of acquittal, dated 21-12-99, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sabalgarh (District Morena, M. P.) in Criminal Appeal No. 2/98. The respondent had been convicted by J. M. F. C. , sabalgarh in Criminal Case No. 89/97, dated 5-12-97 under Section 39 of the Electricity Act, 1910 (in short the 'act') read with section 379 of IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year with a fine of Rs. 500/- with default stipulation.

(2.) THE facts of the case are that on 8-2-97, in the evening R. K. Sharma (P. W. 1) Junior Engineer of madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board, along with Assistant Engineer r. C. Bansal (P. W. 2) and his party went for surprise inspection of electricity theft at gram Kulholi. He found that the respondent has illegally taking electric line from the electric poll and was irrigating his field by a 5 horse power motor. Being a matter of an electricity theft, the report Ex. P. 2 was lodged by Junior Engineer R. K. Sharma (P. W. 1) at the police station Sabalgarh on the basis of which FIR Ex. P. 3 was registered. The charge-sheet was filed before the Judicial magistrate First Class, Sabalgarh. After conclusion of trial, the learned trial Court found the respondent guilty and convicted accordingly as stated in above para one.

(3.) BEING aggrieved by the judgment of conviction, the respondent preferred an appeal before Additional Sessions Judge, sabalgarh and taken the ground that the complaint has not been filed as per provision of Section 50 of Indian Electricity Act, 1910 because Junior Engineer R. K. Sharma (P. W. 1) was not authorized to lodge the report. Apart from this, there is contradictory statement of the prosecution witnesses. Hence, the conviction of the respondent was not proper.