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

2012 Supreme(Del) 967

SURESH KAIT
AJAY GUPTA – Appellant
Versus
BSES RAJDHANI POWER – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr.Ashish Middha, Adv.
Mr.A.B.Pandey, Adv.

SURESH KAIT, J.

1. The instant petition is being filed against the impugned order dated 16.08.2011, whereby, notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C. has been framed against the petitioner.

2. Vide the instant petition, the petitioner has sought to set aside the Notice dated 16.08.2011 and consequent proceedings thereof for the offences punishable under Section 135 of the Electricity Act.

3. Ld. counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the complaint, the petitioner and Deepika Mittal (Registered Consumer) were made respondent/accused. In the said complaint the allegations made against the petitioner in para 3 is reproduced as under:-

“3 That there is no other electricity connection installed at the said property of the petitioner, but the complainant has been wrongly alleging and sending bills in respect of the connection having “K. No. 2541C3240137”, when at the time of the purchase of the said property the petitioner did not find any such connection working at the said property.”

4. Ld. counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner/accused wife had purchased the property bearing No.D-819, New Friends colony, New Delhi, in July, 2003 and the petitioner found installed onl
























































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