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

2008 Supreme(SC) 970

BAIJNATH JHA – Appellant
Versus
SITA RAM – Respondent


ADVOCATES APPEARED
Pramod Swamp, Advocate, for the Appellant;
Manish Kumar and Gopal Singh, Advocates, for the Respondents.

Judgment

DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.- In these appeals challenge is to the order passed by a learned Single Judge of the Patna High Court dismissing the C application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short "the Code"). The validity of the order taking cognizance in Complaint Case No. 40 of 1994 pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Patna City was questioned in the petition filed before the High Court.

2. Background facts as highlighted by the appellant in a nutshell are as d follows:

A raid was conducted on 4-1-1994 in the premises of Respondent 1 by four officers of the Bihar State Electricity Board. The appellant in each of the criminal appeal was a member of the raiding party along with others and one Ravindra Kumar Singh who was then functioning as Executive Engineer. Respondent 1 was arrested on the basis of first information report that was lodged with the police officials. Allegation against Respondent 1 was that he had committed theft of electricity attracting penal consequences under Section 379 of the Penal Code, 1860 (in short "IPC") and Sections 39 and 44 of the Electricity Act, 1910 (in short "the Electricity Act").

3. R



















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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top