Full Text
Date of Decision: 24th July, 2014
LALA RAM ..... Appellant
Through: Ms. Sunita Arora, Advocate for Mr. Krishan Kumar, Advocate
Through: Mr. M.N. Dudeja, APP Mr. Abhay Kumar, Advocate for R-2/
TPDDL
: SUNITA GUPTA, J. (Open Court)
JUDGMENT
1. The appellant Lala Ram has preferred the present appeal against the judgment dated 19th October, 2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Special Electricity Court, Rohini, Delhi in Complaint Case No.144/2006 by which he was convicted under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. As per the provisions of Section 154 (v), liability of Rs.50,000/- was fixed on account of loss suffered by the complainant company due to act of the convict. 2014:DHC:3476
2. The allegations against the appellant were that the appellant was running an atta chakki on the ground floor of premises K-170, Vijay Vihar, Phase II, Delhi. On 28th August, 2004, premises was inspected by a raiding party and accused was found using the electricity supply directly by passing the meter installed under single point delivery contractor by connecting wires from his load to NDPL LV main. As such, he was found committing theft of electricity directly by getting this supply from NDPL LV main.
3. During the course of hearing of the appeal, it was reported that the matter has since been settled before Continuous Lok Adalat-II vide its order dated 6th March, 2013. The appellant had already deposited a sum of Rs.25000/- and offered to pay Rs.15000/- with the respondent company and it is submitted that the amount of Rs.15,000/- was subsequently deposited. Counsel for respondent No.2 has no objection to dispose of the appeal in view of the order dated 6th March, 2013.
4. Since the matter has been finally settled/compounded between the parties before the Continuous Lok Adalat vide order dated 6th March, 2013, which is on record, the appeal filed by the appellant against the impugned judgment stands settled/compounded.
5. In view of the statement made by the counsel for the respondent, the appeal is accepted in terms of settlement. Since the offence stands compounded, the appellant is acquitted of the charge. The appeal stands disposed of. Trial Court record be sent back.
JUDGE JULY 24, 2014