IMPORTANT POINT
Theft of electricity – Presumption is not of automatic application and instead, something is required to be established for it to apply.

JUDGMENT

SANJAY KAROL, J.

1. These appeals, at the instance of the appellant-convict, are directed against the judgment and order dated 15th October, 2010, passed in Criminal Appeal No.270/1997 and Criminal Revision Application No.346/1997, whereby a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Bench at Aurangabad) overturned the findings of acquittal recorded by the IIIrd Jt. Judicial Magistrate (FC) at Jalan in Reg. Criminal Case No.108/93 for the offence punishable under Sections 39 and 44 of the Indian ELECTRICITY ACT , 1910 [Hereinafter referred to as “The Act”].

2. The facts as have been laid out by the Courts below are as follows:-

2.1 The appellant-convict was a Director of M/s. Rushi Steels and Alloys Pvt. Ltd. [Hereinafter referred to as the “Company”], situated at Plot No.52/7 of MIDC Area, Jalan and was responsible for conducting the business of the Company. The power supply to the Company was provided by the Maharashtra State Electricity Board [Hereinafter referred to as “MSEB”].

2.2 The officials of the MSEB, in March 1993, noticed a mismatch between the units supplied to these factories vis- à-vis the readings taken from the meters at these factories. The alleged disparity was to the extent of 36.6 per cent. Naturally, an investigation was followed in the months of April and May 1993. During inspection of the meters placed at the factory of the appellant-convict by senior officials of MSEB, in the presence of independent witnesses, it was found that the meter had been tampered with, and the box in which it was placed had 3 holes of 4 mm each.

2.3 According to the prosecution, the officials of the MSEB concluded that the workers of the Company had been using additional wires, interfering with the meter supply and thereby causing a slowdown in the running of the meter. As such, the holes were sealed. On a subsequent reading of the meter, the disparity was now found to be around 10 per cent.

2.4 The approximate quantification of the alleged theft of electricity was to the tune of Rs.30 lakhs.

2.5 The Executive Engineer, MSEB, lodged a First Information Report with the Taluka Jalan Police Station, on 25th June 1993. Upon completion of the investigation, a chargesheet was filed before the Court on 1st October 1993.

3. The prosecution examined five witnesses. Statement under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure [Hereinafter referred to as “Cr.PC”] of the two accused, namely Radheshyam and Mahaveer, the present appellant-convict (Mahaveer), was also recorded. It may be noted here itself that the appeal qua Radheshyam stood dismissed as abated vide order dated 30th September 2019. The defence did not lead any other evidence and furnished a whole and complete denial of the accusations levelled by the prosecution.

4. The Trial Court, on consideration of the entire evidence, concluded that the prosecution had failed to establish its case beyond a reasonable doubt. It could not prove abstraction, dishonest use or consumption of electrical energy. The charges under Sections 39 and 44 of the Act could not be established and as such, the following order was passed:-

“1. Both the accused viz., (1) Radheshyam S/o Ratanlal Agrawal, age 40 years and 2) Mahaveer S/o Ratanlal Agrawal, age 55 years, Directors of M/s. Rushi Steel and Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Company are hereby acquitted of the punishable offence under Section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910.

2. Both the accused are further acquitted of punishable offence U/sec. 44 of the Indian ELECTRICITY ACT , 1910.

3. Both accused are acquitted under the provisions of Section 248(1) of Cr. P.C.

4. Bail bonds of both accused stand cancelled.

5. Both the ac