GURDIAL SINGH Vs. AVTAR SINGH AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondents, in discharge of their duties as SDO, Electricity Board and Junior Engineers, Electricity Board, were checking withdrawal of extra power by the consumers. Their team seized an extra motor kept by the complainant. Complainant had preferred a complaint for prosecuting them under Section 379/ 380/ 421/ 323/ 500 IPC.

(2.) In the complaint, respondents were summoned as accused. They preferred a revision in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur. Revisions preferred by the respondents were accepted by Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur. It will be apposite here to reproduce the reasoning given by Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur:

(3.) The reasoning given by Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur suffers from no infirmity as he had formulated reasonable opinion. It is part of duty of raiding party to seize the electric motor used unlawfully to withdraw electric power and same in no manner will constitute offence of theft of electric motor and other offences complained.