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

2025 Supreme(HP) 1719

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIRENDER SINGH, J.
Surender Kumar Sain - Petitioner 
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Cr. Revision Nos. : 5, 6, 150 & 220 of 2022 
Decided on :16-12- 2025

Advocate Appeared:
For the petitioner:Mr. Ajay Kochhar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Bhairav Gupta, Anubhav Chopra and Ms. Swati Sharma, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Mr. Varun Chandel, Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Additional Advocate General and Ms. Ranjna Patial, Deputy Advocate General.

Compounding of electricity offence under Electricity Act Section 152 bars prosecutions under IPC Sections 420, 120-B and Prevention of Corruption Act Sections 13(1)(d), 13(2) for same acts, constituting double jeopardy.

Headnote:(A) Electricity Act, 2003 - Sections 135(1)(a), 126, 152 - IPC - Sections 420, 120-B - Prevention of Corruption Act - Sections 13(1)(d), 13(2) - Criminal revisions against trial court order framing charges for alleged dishonest abstraction of electricity via underground cable from connection in one state to industrial unit across border, in alleged connivance with public servants - Offence at best unauthorized use under Section 126, not theft under Section 135 - Competent authority compounded offence under Section 152 by imposing and receiving penalty - Post-compounding, prosecution under IPC and Prevention of Corruption Act offences not maintainable, as acts fall exclusively under Electricity Act; amounts to double jeopardy prohibited under Article 20 Constitution and Section 300 CrPC. (Paras 34-46)

(B) Special Legislation - Precedence over general laws - Comprehensive mechanism under Electricity Act for theft/unauthorized use offences renders parallel IPC prosecutions redundant; compounding by authorized officers bars further criminal trials for same acts. (Paras 42-44)

Facts of the case:
Police registered FIR for alleged electricity theft through three-phase connection in rented room purportedly for welding works but used via underground cable for brick kiln across state border, causing loss to electricity board; charge-sheet against multiple accused including public servants for connivance. Trial court framed charges against three petitioners under specified sections, discharged others. State challenged discharges; petitioners challenged charges.

Findings of Court:
Case held to be unauthorized use, compounded validly; no prima facie case for IPC or Prevention of Corruption Act offences survives post-compounding.

Issues: Whether post-compounding under Electricity Act, related prosecutions under IPC and Prevention of Corruption Act sustainable; distinction between theft under Section 135 and unauthorized use under Section 126; effect of compounding on conspiracy/cheating/corruption charges.

Ratio Decidendi: Compounding under Section 152 Electricity Act extinguishes liability for underlying acts prosecutable under IPC/PC Act when they constitute offences under Electricity Act; prevents double jeopardy; trial court rightly discharged some, but all accused discharged as no surviving case post-compounding.

Result: Criminal revisions by charged accused allowed, discharged from all offences; state's revision dismissed.

Table of Content
1. fir for electricity theft, conspiracy, corruption; investigation details. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. state seeks charges against all under electricity act. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
3. compounding bars trial; bona fide border connection. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
4. no corrupt means proven under pc act. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
5. contractor test report not liable for misuse. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30)
6. unauthorized use under s126, not theft s135. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36)
7. compounding under s152 avoids double jeopardy. (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40)
8. ipc/pc charges not maintainable post-compounding. (Para 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46)
9. accused discharged; state revision dismissed. (Para 47 , 48 , 49)

JUDGMENT :

VIRENDER SINGH, J.

All the above titled revision petitions are being decided by a common order, as, Criminal Revision Nos.5, 6 and 150 of 2022 have been filed by the petitioners against the order dated 21.12.2021, passed by the learned Special Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan (hereinafter referred to as the trial Court’), by virtue of which, the charges, under Sections 420 and 120-B of the IPC, were framed against Satinder Mohan (petitioner in Cr. Revision No.150 of 2022) and Surender Kumar Sain (petitioner in Cr. Revision No.5 of 2022), as well as, Sushil Kumar Goel (petitioner in Cr. Revision No.6 of 2022), against whom, the learned trial Court has framed the charges under Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act. By way of the same order, learned trial Court has discharged the respondents, in Criminal Revision No.220 of 2022.

2.Parties to the present lis are hereinafter referred to in the same manner, in which, they were referred to by the learned trial Court.

3.Brief facts, leading to filing of the above titled Criminal Revisions, before this Court, may be summed up, as under:-

3.1.Police of Police Station SV & ACB, Nahan, has submitted the charge-sheet, in case FIR No.7 of 2011, dated 24.6.2011, registered under Section 135(1) (a) of the Electricity Act, Sections 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘the IPC’) and Sections 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, against the accused persons before the learned trial Court.

3.2.The said charge sheet has been filed on the ground that on 24.06.2011, the then Additional Superintendent of Police, Vimukt Ranjan, SV & ACB, Shimla, Camp at Nahan, has submitted a rukka for registration of the FIR, disclosing therein, that on 24.06.2011, the I.O., along with Dy. SP Ramesh Sharma and Inspector Vidhi Chand, HC Yashwant, in the official vehicle, were present at Kala Amb, where, they came to know from the reliable sources, that at village Joharon, near the premises of M/s Jasmer Packers and Shri Khaduji Industries, in a small room, one power connection of H.P. State Electricity Board Limited has been installed, which is in the name of Satinder Mohan and said Satinder Mohan is running a brick kiln in the adjoining boundary of Haryana in village Dera Hamidpur, Tehsil Narayangarh, District Ambala and the said person, as per the information, in connivance with the officials and officers of the H.P. State Electricity Board, has laid underground cable and using the power supply for the brick kiln, which is situated in Haryana. As such, by using the electricity from the connection, which was issued by the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board, was running the tube well, in his Brick Kiln in Haryana and he has gained illegal benefit by causing financial loss to the State of Himachal Pradesh. As per the said information, if the said spot is visited, then the underground cable can be recovered.

3.3.The said information was found to be authentic and in order to verify the said information, the I.O., along with other police officials, reached at village Joharon and he called the then SDO HPSEB Kala Amb S.K. Goel, upon which, he reached at the spot, along with the officials. T











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 Back to top