Megha

9_wp_3725_2021.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO.3725 OF 2021

1. Praksh Ailani

2. Nitin Prakash Ailani

...Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Maharashtra

2. The Addl. Executive Engineer

Flying squad, MSEDCL, Vashi,

Navi Mumbai.

3. Additional Executive Engineer,

MSEDCL, Ulhasnagar Sub

Division-3

4. Senior Inspector

Ambernath Police Station,

Ambernath

5. Senior Inspector, Central

Police Station, Ulhasnagar-3.

...Respondents

...

Ms Sidhi Taunakaur with Ms Milan Chandnani i/b. Mr. Jaywant S.

Chandnani for the Petitioners.

Mr. J.P. Yagnik, APP for Respondent No.2-State.

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE &

ANIL S. KILOR, JJ.

ORDER DATED : 14^th JANUARY, 2022.

P.C. :

1.

The Petitioners have approached this Court by filing the

present Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

1/9

Megha

9_wp_3725_2021.doc

and Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying to

quash the FIR No.II-55 of 2018 dated 07/04/2018 registered with

Ambernath Police Station on 07/04/2018 for the offences punishable

under Sections 135 and 138 of Electricity Act, 2003 and charge sheet

filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class and Jt. Civil

Judge, Junior Division, Ulhasnagar.

2.

It is the case of the Petitioners that Petitioners are running

the business of Electrical at Ulahsnagar and Maharashtra State

Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. (MSEDCL) has provided the electric

connection under Consumer No.021510835988/0. It is alleged that

the officers of Flying Squad of Respondent No.2-MSEDCL conducted

inspection of the Petitioners’ premises and reported that the electric

meter and CT of the Petitioners’ premises was tampered by installing

a remote circuit in it, due to which the meter was running slow and

thereby theft has been committed by the Petitioners. Accordingly,

the officers of the Flying Squad seized and sealed.

3.

Accordingly, the present petition has been filed for

quashing of the FIR and charge sheet in question.

2/9

Megha

9_wp_3725_2021.doc

4.

We have heard the learned counsel for the respective

parties.

5.

Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that since last

20 years the electric connection has been provided to the premises of

the Petitioners. However, there was no complaint in last 20 years. It

is further submitted that a year back when the routine inspection was

carried out, it was assessed that the meter was running properly.

5.

It is argued that without disclosing the identification by the

Officers of the Flying Squad, the meter was removed and the power

was cut without assigning any reason and providing any document

like seizure panchanama. It is further argued that without following

due process, the electric supply was disconnected and the electric

meter was removed.

6.

It is submitted that after seizure of the meter nothing has

been found in the electric meter or CT of the Petitioners and no

procedure was followed while conducting the search as per Section

3/9

Megha

9_wp_3725_2021.doc

100 of Cr.P.C. Hence, the whole process of inspection vitiates.

7.

It is submitted that though the videography was carried out

at the time of inspection, the same has not been provided to them

though a demand for the same was made.

8.

Learned counsel for the Petitioners has drawn attention of

this Court to the panchanama carried out by Respondent No.2. One

panchanama relates to the Petitioners whereas second panchanama

relates to some other premises prepared on the same day. The

learned counsel for the Petitioners by drawing attention of this Court

to the time recorded on both the panchanamas, submits that for the

panchas it was not possible to reach the other premises after carrying

out the inspection at the premises of Petitioners, within the time

shown in the another panchanama.

9.

It is also alleged that the investigating agency has

tampered the CT and a false case has b