THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.16380 of 2024

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioner in Crl.M.P.No.138 of 2024 in Crime No.6514 of 2021, on the file of the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Medak, Sangareddy District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections

135 and 138 of the Electricity Act, 2003.

2. Heard Sri P.V.L. Bhanu Prakash, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana, appearing on behalf of respondent No.2.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the procedure prescribed under the Electricity Act, 2003, has not been properly followed by the respondents and that the complaint should have been filed before the jurisdictional Magistrate and thereafter on committal Special Court has to take the file, but in the present case, the complaint was directly filed before the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Medak, which is contrary to the procedure established by law. Therefore, he prayed the Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition.

4. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 submitted that the procedure adopted is in strict compliance with the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003. He submitted that upon detection of unauthorized use of electricity, the power supply to the consumer is liable to be disconnected, and as per Section 152 of the Electricity Act, if the consumer pays 50% of the assessed amount, the matter is placed before the Special Court constituted under Section 153 of the Electricity Act for adjudication of civil liability under Section 154 of the Act. He further submitted that in the present case, the consumer has already paid 50% of the assessed amount and the complaint was rightly filed before the Special Court for determination of liability. Therefore, he contended that there is no procedural irregularity and prayed the Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

5. On a careful consideration of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and on perusal of the material available on record, it appears that Section 154 of the Electricity Act, 2003, specifically provides for the procedure and powers of the Special Court. As per Section 154(1), the Special Court shall have the jurisdiction to try offences punishable under the Act. Further, under Section 154(5), the Special Court shall determine the civil liability against a person in unauthorized use of electricity, and the same shall be recoverable as if it were a decree of a civil court.

6. It is also observed that as per the procedure contemplated, after the consumer deposits 50% of the assessed amount, the complaint is to be submitted before the Special Court for further adjudication. In the present case, it is not disputed that the consumer has paid 50% of the assessed amount and the complaint was filed before the I Additional District and Sessions Court, who is designated as the Special Court under Section 153 of the Electricity Act, 2003.

7. In view of the above, the procedure adopted by the respondents is in accordance with the provisions of Sections 152, 153, and 154 of the Electricity Act, 2003. Therefore, there is no merit in the present Criminal Petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

_____________________ JUSTICE K. SUJANA Date: 03.07.2025 SAI THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.16380 of 2024 Date: 03.07.2025 SAI