The prosecution must prove the charge against the accused beyond reasonable doubt, and in the absence of conclusive evidence, the presumption of innocence prevails.

JUDGMENT :

1. The present Appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and order passed in Special Case No. (Electricity) 11 of 2009 dated 25.11.2011, by the learned Special Judge (GEB), Bhuj- Kachchh, recording acquittal of the Respondent – Original Accused – Chandubhai Jivabhai @ Jivrambhai Limbachiya (hereinafter referred to as “the Respondent”), who was charged with the offence punishable under Section 135 (A) of The Indian Electricity Act 2003 (hereinafter referred to as “the Electricity Act”).

2. The facts of the case briefly as summarized are that the complainant Dy. Engineer – Jaswantrao Ramarao Jampala, GEB Bhuj City Sub Division lodged a complaint against the Respondent accused before GEB Police Station, Rajkot, vide CR No. II-2394/2007 for the alleged offences under Section 135(1)(A) of Indian Electricity Act, 2003. According to the complainant, it is the case of the prosecution that on 3.10.2007, checking was carried out at the premises of Respondent accused situated in the basement of Sulay Apartment, Jubilee Ground, Mandvi Road i.e. Opera Hair Parlour, having Customer No. 38910/03254/5 and during their inspection, respondent was found committing theft of electricity by way of illegal means. Therefore, an average bill of Rs.2,07,318.97 ps. was prepared and issued to Respondent, which was not paid by him within a period of limitation and therefore, complaint was lodged against respondent before GEB Police Station, Rajkot as aforesaid.

3. Upon such FIR being filed, investigation started and the Investigating Officer PW-5 – Gajendra Kanubha Vala (hereinafter referred to as “the I.O”) has recorded statements of the witnesses and produced number of documentary evidence. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed against the Respondent for the offence in question, since the I.O. found a prima facie case against the Respondent, charge sheet came to be filed before the learned Magistrate for the offence under Section 135 (A) of the Electricity Act.

4. As the case was exclusively triable by the Court of learned Special Judge, the learned Magistrate was pleased to commit the case to the Special Court, Gandhinagar under Section 209 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which came to registered as Special Case (Electricity Case) No. 11 of 2009.

5. On committal, the case was transferred and placed for trial before the learned Special Judge (GEB), Bhuj-Kachchh, who had initially framed charge against the Respondent for the alleged offence. The charge was read over to the Respondent and the plea of the Respondent came to be recorded, wherein the Respondent pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried.

6. In order to bring home the charge leveled against the Respondent, the prosecution has examined as many as 5 witnesses and relied upon their oral testimonies. The prosecution has also produced 14 documentary evidences.

7. After recording of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses was over, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted closing purshis vide Exh.30. Thereafter the Court below explained to the Respondent the circumstances appearing against him in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and recorded his further statement under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code. In his further statement, the Respondent denied the case of the prosecution in entirety and submitted that he has been roped in a false case. However, he has neither lead any evidence nor did he examine any witness in support of his defence.

8. At the end of the trial, on appreciation, evaluation, analysis and scrutiny of the evidence on record, the learned Special Judge (GEB), Bhuj - Kachchh vide judgment and order dated 25.11.2011 was pleased to acquit the Respondent for the offence under Section 135 (A) of the Electricity Act holding inter alia that the prosecution has failed to prove the charge against the Respondent beyond reasonable doubt.

9. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and order dated 25.