JVVNL, JODHPUR Vs. AMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) In this criminal appeal filed under Section 372 Cr.P.C., the Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., is challenging validity of the judgment dated 28.6.2013 passed by Special Court, Electricity Offence cum Addl. District Judge No.l, Sri Ganganagar in Sessions Case No. 97/11 whereby the learned trial Court acquitted the respondent from the offence under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and passed an order to refund the amount of Rs. 55,590/-, deposited by him under protest on 12.3.2013.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that the judgment impugned is totally erroneous because it has been passed without application of mind and considering the reliable and cogent evidence produced by the Company before the trial Court. It is also argued that the prosecution was launched against the respondent after expiry of one year and nine months and for the such delay, an explanation was also furnished by leading evidence but the trial Court has failed to consider the evidence produced by the appellant to explain the delay, so also, the learned trial Court has completely failed to consider the important aspect of the case that before registration of case notice for demand was given by the appellant Company, therefore, the judgment impugned deserves to be quashed and respondent is liable to be punished.