BUDHPRIYA GANESH Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, Budhpriya Ganesh has prayed for quashing of FIR of Naubat Pur P.S. Case No. 68/2013 registered under Sections 135, 138 of the Electricity Act ("the Act" for all future references).

(2.) Naubat Pur P.S. Case No. 68/2013 has been registered on the written report submitted by Basuki Shankar Rajak, Assistant Electrical Engineer on 21.03.2013 disclosing the fact that, Budhpriya Ganesh, who bears Consumer No. NP 4137 (industrial) premises was inspected on 21.03.2013 under the leader-ship of Executive Engineer and found the electrical energy being consumed stealthily by means of tampering meter and on account thereof, caused loss to the Electrical Department to the tune of Rs. 2,80,624/-.

(3.) It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that registration of FIR happens to be bad, illegal and is suffering from malice and grudge. It has further been submitted that on a prayer made on behalf of petitioner himself, time to time, there is enhancement of load right from 5 HP to 21 HP, the last one for which inspection was made on 28.07.2012 without any complaint. Therefore, allegation of tampering of meter is nothing but an imaginary story propounded by the Electrical Department to satisfy their personal vendetta. It has further been submitted that for reading of the meter, meter reader is being deployed, whose function, apart from reading of meter, is also to inform the Electricity Department with regard to any sort of sabotage committed by the consumer during course of consumption of electricity by means of using external application or bypassing, tampering the meter. No such information is there. It has further been submitted that on a representation made by the petitioner the competent authority of the Electricity Department had considered the case inconsonance with the quantum of loss and after having analytical approach thereupon the amount Rs. 2,80,624/- has been reduced to 1,90,540/- which the petitioner had already paid. So submission is, it is not the case of theft, rather even admitted for the sake of argument, happens to be of unauthorized use of electricity as there was lacking of dishonest intention. It has also been submitted that even after repeated request, the Department failed to test the meter to find out whether there was any sort of external application making the meter idle.