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

2010 Supreme(Ker) 378

V.RAMKUMAR
Chacko – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Executive Engineer, K. S. E. B. – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Anil Thomas (Melemalayil), Advocate.
For the Respondent: C.M. Kammappu, Public Prosecutor.

Judgment :

1. Petitioners, who are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.201/2003 of Mundakkayam Police Station and subsequently taken on file as C.C.No.687/2004 before the J.F.C.M, Kanjirappally and now pending before the Additional Sessions Court (Special), Kottayam as S.C.No.284/2008 for offences punishable under S.39 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 seeks to quash the entire proceedings against the petitioners.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners were found illegally abstracting electricity to the shed belonging to the 1st petitioner on 18.6.2003 by tapping from the electric post and thereby committed the aforesaid offence. The above crime was registered on the basis of a complaint filed by the Assistant Executive Engineer, Major Section, KSEB, Mundakkayam. Subsequently cognizance was taken by the Magistrate on the strength of the final report filed by the Police.

3. Apart from the fact that cognizance could not have been taken on a police report, invocation of S.39 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 was also misconceived. The occurrence took place on 18.06.2003. Indian Electricity Act, 1910 was repealed by Electricity Act, 2003 which came into force on 10.6.200



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