The petitioner, one of the accused in Motihari (Town) P.S. Case No. 289 of 2002 has prayed for the quashing of the entire criminal proceeding arising therefrom including the order dated 28.2.2003 passed therein by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari, whereby he has taken cognizance against the petitioner and others under section 379 IPC and sections 39/44 of the Indian Electricity Act.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that notwithstanding disconnection of his electricity line, in course of a. raid in the premises of the petitioner by officials of the Electricity Board on 21.11.2002 he was found committing theft of electrical energy by extracting it from the main supply line by means of tapping due to which the Board had suffered heavy Revenue loss.

3. The submission on behalf of the petitioner is that he having been transferred to Patna his house remained looked and he had no knowledge of the disconnection and even otherwise he had paid a sum of Rs. 34,729.71 as demanded by the Board towards the alleged revenue loss and a receipt had been granted for the same which would mean that the Board had accepted the same. The further submission is that he had already surrendered the connection and upon his request, Executive Engineer wrote a letter to the Additional Secretary of the Board suggesting for withdrawal of the case so far as the petitioner is concerned as no dues remained with the petitioner. This letter is Annexure 4 to the application.

4. As usual the learned counsel for the Electricity Board is conspicuous by his absence.

5. In similar circumstances where the case had been filed under the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 and during the pendency of the case the said Act was repealed and replaced by Electricity Act, 2003, a Bench of this Court in the case of Binod Giri Vs. State of Bihar, reported in 2007(2) PLJR 578 observed that the provisions of the New Act would apply and since the offence of theft of electricity has been made compoundable in view of section 152 of the New Act, it would apply in this case and acceptance of the amount will have the effect of acquittal. I am in respectful agreement with the same.

6. Accordingly the impugned order taking cognizance and the criminal prosecution so far as the petitioner is concerned, is quashed and the application is allowed.