SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1966 Supreme(SC) 51

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.K. SARKAR AND J.R. MUDHOLKAR, JJ.
Ram Chandra Prasad Sharma and others, Appellants
Versus
State of Bihar and another, Respondents.
Criminal Appeals Nos. 48 to 51 of 1963, dated 8-2-1966.
Advocates appeared
M/s. Nuruddin Ahmad and U. P. Singh, Advocates, for Appellants (In Cri. As. Nos. 48 to 50 of 1963) and Appellant No. 2 (In Cri. A. No. 51 of 1963); M/s. D. P. Singh and U. P. Singh, Advocates, for Appellant No. 1 (In Cri. A. No. 51 of 1963); M/s. A. N. Sahay, N. K. Prasad Rukhaiyer and D. Goburdhan, Advocates, for Respondent No. 1; M/s. A. N. Sahay and S. P. Varma, Advocates, for Respondent No. 2.

Advocates:
A.N.SAHAY, D.GOVERDHAN CHARY, D.P.Singh, N.K.PRASAD, Nuruddin Ahmed, S.P.Varma, Udaipratap Singh

The existence of an artificial means for dishonest abstraction of electrical energy raises a presumption of dishonest abstraction under S. 39 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910.

Headnote:

INDIAN ELECTRICITY ACT, 1910 - Ss. 39, 44(c), 50 - R. 138 read with R. 56 - Dishonest abstraction of electrical energy - Tampering with meters - Offences under Ss. 39, 44(c) and R. 138 read with R. 56 - Interpretation and application.

Fact of the Case:

Prosecutions were launched against certain persons running mills or factories supplied with energy by the Patna Electricity Supply Company (P.E.S. Co.) for offences under Ss. 39 and 44(c) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, and R. 138 read with R. 56 made under the Act. The accused were acquitted by the trial magistrate but convicted by the High Court.

Finding of the Court:

The High Court held that the accused were consumers as defined in S. 2(c) of the Act and that they were guilty of offences under S. 44(c) and R. 138 read with R. 56. However, the High Court set aside the convictions under S. 39, holding that there was no evidence to show that there was any perfected artificial means in existence so as to raise the presumption of dishonest abstraction under S. 39.

Issues: 1. Whether the accused were consumers as defined in S. 2(c) of the Act? 2. Whether the accused were guilty of offences under S. 44(c) and R. 138 read with R. 56? 3. Whether the accused were guilty of offences under S. 39?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The accused were consumers as defined in S. 2(c) of the Act as they were supplied with energy by P.E.S. Co. and their premises were connected with the works of P.E.S. Co. 2. The accused were guilty of offences under S. 44(c) and R. 138 read with R. 56 as the meters had been tampered with and the company's seals broken. 3. The accused were not guilty of offences under S. 39 as there was no evidence to show that there was any perfected artificial means in existence so as to raise the presumption of dishonest abstraction under S. 39.

Final Decision: The appeals were allowed in part. The convictions and sentences under S. 44(c) and R. 138 read with R. 56 were upheld. The convictions and sentences under S. 39 were set aside.

Judgment

MUDHOLKAR, J. : By a common judgment delivered on January 23, 1963 the High Court at Patna decided four appeals preferred by the State of Bihar and two criminal revision petitions, one on behalf of the complainant and another on behalf of an accused person. These appeals arose out of four prosecutions launched against certain persons running mills or factories which were supplied with energy by the Patna Electricity Supply Company (hereafter referred to as P. E. S. Co. for the sake of brevity). The offences with which they were charged were under Ss. 39 and 44 (c) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 (9 of 1910) and R.138 read with R. 56 made under the Act. The trying magistrate acquitted all those persons who are appellants before us in respect of each of these offences, except Ram Chander Prasad, appellant in Crl. A. 48 of 1963. He was convicted of all the three offences and sentenced variously. In appeal he was acquitted of the offence under S. 39 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patna while his conviction and sentences under the other two provisions were upheld. The State thereupon preferred an appeal against his acquittal under S. 417 Code of Criminal Procedure before the High Court. The State 1ikewise preferred appeals against the acquittal of the accused persons in the other three cases. All the appeals were heard together and were substantially allowed. The complainant Ram Chander Prasad Sharma s petition was allowed and that of an accused persons dismissed. The accused persons have, therefore, preferred four appeals before us and though we will deal with them in this judgment we will take them separately one after the other.

Criminal Appeal No. 48 of 1963

2. According to the prosecution, on June 11, 1958 the Assistant Engineer (Mains) of the P. E. S. Co. by name Chatterjee visited the Ramji Mills situate at Dinapur. The mill is run with a 15 horse power motor which is supplied with electric energy by P. E. S. Co. It is provided with a three phase meter. Chatterjee found the mill working but noticed that the disc of the meter was not rotating with the result that the consumption of electrical energy was not being registered at all. Upon inspection of the meter Chatterjee noticed that a piece of wire had been inserted into the meter through the top stud hole on the right hand side of the meter cover. This had been done by unscrewing the nut and thus exposing the stud hole. Eventually a report was made to the police by Chatterjee at the instance of Ramaswami the then Chief Engineer and General Manager of P. E. S. Co. After investigation the appellant was placed for trial before the Judicial Magistrate. First Class, Dinapur. He framed charges against him in respect of all the three offences. The appellant pleaded not guilty and denied having inserted the wire inside the meter or to have tampered with it in any way. His main defence, however, was that the mill belonged to the joint family and its management was in the hands of his father Nathuni Thakur. He further said that he was practicing medicine and was running a homoeopathic dispensary in Dinapur. He did not deny that the meter had been tampered with but according to him this was done by Chatterjee himself because he was not given illegal gratification which he had demanded from Lohari Pandit, who was the munshi of the mill.

3. All the courts are concurrent in holding that the appellant was running the mills and that he was a consumer as defined in S. 2(c) of the Act. Moreover, his convictions under S. 44 (c) and under R. 138 read with R. 56 are not challenged before us. In the circumstances it is not open to him now to say that he had no concern with the mills. The only question then is whether the offence under S. 39 has been brought home to him. Section 39 of the Act reads thus :

Whoever dishonestly abstracts consumes or uses any energy shall be deemed to have committed theft within the meaning of the Indian Penal Code and the existence of artificial means for



























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top