Disposed

Surendra Lal v. State of U P and 3 Others

Allahabad HC13 Oct 2020CRLP/10441/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Coram B. Amit Sthalekar, J. and Shekhar Kumar Yadav, J. disposed of Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 10441 of 2020 filed by Surendra Lal challenging an FIR under Section 135 of the Indian Electricity Act (Amendment 2003). The Court directed the petitioner to file a settlement application before the concerned authorities within three weeks under Section 152 regarding electricity dues. No coercive a

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file settlement application before authorities within three weeks; no coercive action for six weeks; petition finally disposed of.

Surendra Lal Vs State of U P and 3 Others — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10441 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Surendra Lal Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudheer Kumar Singh,Rajiv Lochan Shukla

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Vijai Kumar Srivastava

¶5

Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J. Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Vijay Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The petitioner in the present writ petition is seeking quashing of the F.I.R. dated 07.08.2020 registered as Case Crime No. 0687 of 2020, under Section 135 of Indian Electricity Act (Amendment 2003), P.S. Anti Power Theft, District Azamgarh with a further prayer not to arrest him in pursuance of the said first information report.

¶8

Allegation in the FIR is that petitioner is guilty of theft of electricity by using 'katiya'.

¶9

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is having a valid connection of the electricity and is regularly depositing the electricity dues, if any, and no dues are pending and the FIR against the petitioner is totally false and fabricated and has been lodged just to harass the petitioner, who is about 75 years old.

¶10

It is further submitted that the offence is compoundable and the petitioner is ready to settle the dispute of electricity dues, if any.

¶11

Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 as well as learned AGA disputed the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there has been some dispute regarding the dues in question but they may approach the authorities concerned for settlement outside the Court as there is provision under Section 152 of the Electricity Act for compounding the offence to which the learned counsel for the petitioner is ready to participate for compounding the proceeding before the authorities.

¶12

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the

¶13

parties, the petitioner is directed to file an application within three weeks from today before the authorities concerned for settlement of dispute of electricity dues between the petitioner and respondent no.2. The concerned authority shall allow the proceeding for compounding the proceeding and shall pass appropriate orders within three weeks thereafter in accordance with law positively.

¶14

For a period of six weeks, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner in the aforesaid case.

¶15

With the above direction, this petition is finally disposed of. Order Date :- 13.10.2020 RavindraKSingh

Surendra Lal v. State of U P and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendra Lal v. State of U P and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kasturi Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Seema and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Nagma and 2 Others Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Ankush Jindal and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Rajan Garg and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vijay Singh Yadav @ Gauri Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others