JOGINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal revision filed by Joginder Singh has been directed against the judgment dated 21st February, 1997 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar, who convicted the petitioner under Section 418, Indian Penal Code, instead of Section 420, Indian Penal Code, while the petitioner was convicted and sentenced under the latter section by the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Siwani.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that Shri Raj Singh Beniwal, Junior Engineer, informed the S.D.O. to the effect that Umed Singh, co-accused of the petitioner, had deposited a security of Rs. 85/- on 17th April, 1990 for obtaining electric connection. In January, 1991, Raj Singh Beniwal, Junior Engineer, in pursuance of this application sent the estimate through Shri Dhanpat, who was employed on daily wages, but he was informed that there was already installed a meter in the house of Umed Singh and the description of the meter was given on the file. On 6th June, 1991, Shri Raj Singh Beniwal intimated the office of the S.D.O. for inquiry into the matter and consequently on 20th June, 1991 on checking, it was found that without any sanction, there was installed a meter of Jaipur 10-20 Amp. No. 10027060 and Shri Umed Singh told the S.D.O. that Joginder Singh, who is posted as Assistant Lineman, had installed this meter after obtaining a sum of Rs. 275/- from him. Joginder Singh accused had also attested the security file as per account No. S-609, while it was found that it was consumer number of one Lakhi Ram. On this report of the S.D.O., case was registered and investigated. The meter, electric wires etc. were taken into possession. On completion of the investigation, challan was put up.

(3.) VIDE judgment and order dated 9th September, 1994 passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Siwani, convicted petitioner Joginder Singh for an offence under Section 420, Indian Penal Code, for cheating the Electricity Board by installing an unauthorised meter in the house of accused Umed Singh, and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and directed him to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, and in default of payment of fine he was ordered to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month. Aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, the petitioner filed the first appeal in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Hissar, who vide judgment dated 21st February, 1997, instead of maintaining the conviction under Section 420, IPC maintained the conviction under Section 418, IPC, and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner was directed to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month.