Back
2017 Supreme(P&H) 903
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Amit Rawal, J.
Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. and Ors. – Appellants
Vs.
Akal Foods Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. – Respondents
CWP No. 389 of 2016
Decided On : 12-01-2017
For the Appellant : G.S. Gurna
For the Respondent: M.S. Rana
The power of the Special Court to determine civil liability in criminal proceedings initiated by the Electricity Board.
Headnote:
Electricity Theft - Challenge to Assessment Order - Sections 135, 126(6) of Electricity Act, 2003 - The court discussed the provisions of Sections 135 and 126(6) of the Electricity Act, 2003, which deal with theft of electricity and assessment rates. The court highlighted the power of the Special Court to determine civil liability in criminal proceedings initiated by the Electricity Board, ensuring the Board does not have to file a separate suit for recovery.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged an order directing the refund of the amount recovered on the basis of a provisional assessment notice for electricity theft. The respondent contested the allegations of theft and argued that the petitioners had not approached the court with clean hands.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no illegality or perversity in the impugned order and dismissed the writ petition.
Issues: Challenge to assessment order, alleged electricity theft, jurisdiction of the Civil Court.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the power of the Special Court to determine civil liability in criminal proceedings initiated by the Electricity Board, ensuring the Board does not have to file a separate suit for recovery.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed.
Amit Rawal, J.
1. The petitioners have approached this Court seeking vindication of the grievance by challenging the order dated 05.06.2015 (Annexure P-4) passed by Sub-Divisional-cum-Additional Deputy Commissioner, Sangrur, who accepted the appeal filed by M/s. Akal Foods Private Limited-contesting respondents, whereby, Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as PSPCL), Patiala, was directed to refund the entire amount recovered on the basis of the provisional assessment notice No. 1423/25 dated 28.01.2008. Ms. G.S. Gurna, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that respondent is a consumer of electricity of petitioner-Corporation. On 25.01.2008, a checking party conducted a raid on the premises of respondent and found that electricity theft is being committed by using direct connection in the poultry farm. On the basis of said checking report dated 25.01.2008 (Annexure P-1), a provisional order of assessment dated 28.01.2008 (Annexure P-2) under Section 135 of Electricity Act of 2003 was issued and respondent was asked to deposit the assessed penalty charges of Rs. 17,54,757/- and if he wants to get the offence compounded, the compounding fees as per the provisions of Section 152(2) of the said Act is to be deposited. Thereafter, respondent filed an appeal against the final assessment order (Annexure P-3) before respondent No. 2 - Sub-Divisional Magistrate-cum-Additional Deputy Cominissioner, Sangrur which was accepted vide order dated 15.06.2015 (Annexure P-4), thus, the present writ petition.
2. M.S. Rana, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 1 filed the written statement in the Court today which is taken on record. He submits that the present writ petition is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed as the petitioners have not approached this Court with clean hands and the submissions made by them are without merit. He further submits that no checking as alleged was done in the presence of the answering respondent. The respondent has been paying the bills regularly and there was no theft of electricity.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and appraised the paper book.
4. For the sake of brevity, the provisions of Sections 135 and 126 (6) of the Electricity Act, 2003 read thus:
Section 135. (Theft of Electricity): 1(1) Whoever, dishonestly, (a) taps, makes or causes to be made any connection with overhead, underground or under water lines or cables, or service wires, or service facilities of a licensee or supplier as the case may be; or
(b) tampers a meter, installs or uses a tampered meter, current reversing transformer, loop connection or any other device or method which interferes with accurate or proper registration, calibration or metering of electric current or otherwise results in a manner whereby electricity is stolen or wasted; or
(c) damages or destroys an electric meter, apparatus, equipment, or wire or causes or allows any of them to be so damaged or destroyed as to interfere with the proper or accurate metering of electricity,
(d) uses electricity through a tampered meter; or
(e) uses electricity for the purpose other than for which the usage of electricity was authorised, so as to abstract or consume or use electricity shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or with fine or with both:
Provided that in a case where the load abstracted, consumed, or used or attempted abstraction or attempted consumption or attempted use --
(i) does not exceed 10 kilowatt, the fine imposed on first conviction shall not be less than three times the financial gain on account of such theft of electricity and in the event of second or subsequent conviction the fine imposed shall not be less than six times the financial gain on account of such theft of electricity;
(ii) exceeds 10 kilowatt, the fine imposed on first conviction shall not be less than three times the financial gain on account of such theft of electricity and
