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

2019 Supreme(P&H) 466

MANOJ BAJAJ
State of Haryana – Appellant
Versus
Ram Saran – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:Mr. Ankur Mittal, Addl.A.G., Haryana for the petitioner.
Mr. Sunil Sihag, Advocate for the respondent.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Manoj Bajaj, J.:- The State of Haryana is in criminal revision to assail the order dated 18.5.2009 passed by Special Judge, Faridabad whereby respondent (accused) was discharged in case FIR No.23 dated 23.1.2006 registered at Police Station Mujessar for the offences under Section 135, 138 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (for short ‘the Act’)

2. The brief facts leading to the revision are that a checking party of Dakhsin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. (for short ‘DHBVNL’) inspected the premises of M/s Faridabad Hotel Delite Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.23B, Industrial Area, Faridabad owned by Ram Saran Bhatia (accusedrespondent) on 17.1.2006. It was found that there was dishonest use of electricity, which is punishable under Sections 135 and 138 of the Act. According to the report, loss of Rs.63,33,347/- was caused. Thereafter, a formal complaint was made by the SDO(OP), Sub Division No.3, DHVBNL, Sector 22, Fariadabad whereupon case FIR No.23 dated 23.1.2006 for the offences under Sections 135 and 138 of the Electricity Act, 2003 was registered. Prior to it, a demand notice was issued on 19.1.2006 giving the respondent 3 days’ time for compounding the offences by paying the amount,



























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