Court No. - 79

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2899 of 2021

Revisionist :- Suresh Kumar

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others

Counsel for Revisionist :- Ali Hasan,Ali Hasan

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

Heard, learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for

the State and perused the record.

This criminal revision has been filed against the order dated

20.09.2021 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act,

Jaunpur in Criminal Complaint Case No.89 of 2018 (Suresh

Kumar vs. Shiv Pujan and others), under Sections 167, 467,

468, 471, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3 (1) 10 SC/ST, Act,

Police Station Kerakat, District Jaunpur.

Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that on

08.01.2018 private respondents (officials of power corporation)

reached at the house of revisionist for checking, when he came

back from the court, he saw that his father was being abused by

the private respondents, and thereafter issued excess bill of the

electricity only with intention to victimize the revisionist. In

this regard, he made compliant to the Superintendent of Police,

Jaunpur through registered post, but no action was taken, and

thereafter, application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was

moved, which was treated as compliant case and order for

recording the statements under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. was

passed and after recording the statement in the aforesaid

provisions, trial court rejected his complaint on the presumption

that the contents of the statements are contradictory and also

observed that only with intention to make pressure on the

authorities in relation to electricity dues. He further submitted

that at the time of taking cognizance, court below has

committed wrong by treating the statement recorded, under

Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. as evidence, therefore, indulgence

of this Court is necessary.

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of revisionist and submitted

that record itself reveals that there was a dispute in relation to

the payment/bill of electricity dues and earlier application for

scrutiny of the meter was also given on 11.11.2017 and on

18.11.2017 reading was recorded. He further submitted that

Annexure-5 reveals that a Complaint No.89 of 2018 was filed

before District Consumer Forum, Jaunpur by the revisionist on

09.01.2018 with the prayer for setting aside the excess bill on

the connection of revisionist i.e. amounting Rs.67,388/- and in

the said complaint no averments in relation to the alleged

incident dated 08.01.2018 is mentioned. As in para-5 of the

aforesaid complaint before the consumer redressal forum, it is

mentioned that recovery proceeding has been initiated by the

officials of the Power Corporation and the revisionist is being

harassed and the court below rightly observed that only with

intention to make pressure on the authorities, the complaint was

filed as the revisionist is a defaulter, therefore, there is no

illegality in the order passed by the court below.

Considering the arguments of learned counsel for the revisionist

as well as learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of

impugned order, complaint, statement recorded under Sections

200 and 202 Cr.P.C. as well documents appended with the

revision, it is evident that there was some dispute in relation to

the electricity bill in between the revisionist and officials of

Power Corporation and on his request again scrutiny was done,

and thereafter, feeling aggrieved against the action of the

officials of the power corporation, a complaint before District

Consumer Forum was filed on 09.01.2018 and no averments are

found in the aforesaid complaint in relation to incident dated

08.01.2018. The complaint filed by the revisionist, under

Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. as well as in their statements recorded

under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., it is evident that dispute

related to bill is alleged and court below has rightly appreciated

the