Allowed¶13

Smt. Usha Singh v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Delhi HC8 Jul 2025CRL.M.C./1023/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR – Electricity Act, 2003 – Ss. 135/138 electricity theft / meter tampering – compoundable offences under S. 152 – settlement before Delhi State Legal Services Authority, National Lok Adalat (Rs. 1,38,733/- paid; No Dues Certificate by BSES Yamuna Power Ltd.) – inherent/discretionary power under S. 528 BNSS 2023 – abuse of process – reliance on Suresh Ganpati Halvankar v. State of Maharashtra, Cr. App. No. 156/2018 (Supreme Court) – CRL.M.C. 1023/2025, Delhi High Court, Amit Mahajan J., decided 08.07.2025.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 143/2023 registered at Police Station Vivek Vihar under Sections 135/138 of the Electricity Act, 2003, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, quashed; petition allowed. ¶13

Smt. Usha Singh Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

FIR No. 143/2023 registered at Police Station Vivek Vihar under Sections 135/138 of the Electricity Act, 2003, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, quashed; petition allowed.

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No. 143/2023 (P.S. Vivek Vihar) under Sections 135/138 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and all consequential proceedings should be quashed in view of the amicable settlement between the parties and the compoundable nature of the offences.

¶3

Court's answer

Offences under Section 135/138 of the Electricity Act are compoundable in nature.

¶8

Ratio / Principle

Adopting the Supreme Court's categorial holding in Suresh Ganpati Halvankar, offences under Sections 135 and 138 of the Electricity Act are both compoundable in terms of Section 152 of the Act.

¶9

Key takeaways

In view of the amicable settlement, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the dispute alive; continuance of the proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of Court, making this a fit case to exercise discretionary jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.ratio¶11
FIR No. 143/2023 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.ratio¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Amit Mahajan, J.) allowed a petition under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 and quashed FIR No. 143/2023, P.S. Vivek Vihar, registered for offences under Sections 135/138, Electricity Act, 2003 (alleged meter tampering and theft of electricity). Following an inspection of the petitioner's premises on 03.02.2023 and filing of the chargesheet, the parties amicably settled before the Delhi State Legal Services Authority, National Lok Adalat on 10.12.2023 for Rs. 1,38,733/-, which was duly paid, and BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. (Respondent No. 2) issued a No Dues Certificate and raised no objection to quashing. Holding that offences under Sections 135 and 138 of the Act are compoundable in nature under Section 152 of the Act, as categorically held by the Supreme Court in Suresh Ganpati Halvankar v. The State of Maharashtra, Cr. Appeal No. 156/2018, the Court found continuance of proceedings after the settlement would amount to abuse of process and quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings.

¶1

$~54

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 1023/2025

¶4

SMT. USHA SINGH .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Gaurav Vashisht, Adv. along with petitioner.

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR

¶8

.....Respondent

¶9

Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, SC for the State. SI Sumeet, PS Vivek Vihar. Mr. Rajesh Pathak, Adv. for complainant along with Mr. Rahul Keshav through V..C.

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN

¶11

O R D E R % 08.07.2025

¶12

CRL.M.A. 4658/2025 ( exemption )

¶13

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶14

The application stands disposed of.

¶15

CRL.M.C. 1023/2025

¶16

The present petition is filed quashing of FIR No.143/2023 dated 12.04.2023, registered at Police Station Vivek Vihar, for offences under Section 135/138 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (‘ the Act ’), including all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. Chargesheet has been filed in the present case.

¶17

On 03.02.2023, the premises owned by the petitioner was

¶18

Page 1 of 3

¶19

CRL.M.C. 1023/2025

¶20

This is a digitally signed order.

¶21

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 31/07/2025 at 12:26:45

¶22

inspected. Allegedly, it was found that the petitioner had tampered with the meter that was installed on her premises and she had dishonestly stolen electricity. This led to registration of the present FIR.

¶23

The present petition is filed on the ground that the matter was amicably settled between the parties before the Delhi State Legal Services Authority, National Lok Adalat on 10.12.2023 for a sum of ₹1,38,733/-, and it was decided that an extra rebate of 12% will be given on the settlement amount if the full amount is paid by 10.12.2023. It is stated that the settlement amount was duly paid by the petitioner by the said date and Respondent No. 2 has also issued a No Dues Certificate in favour of the petitioner.

¶24

The petitioner is present in person. Mr. Rahul Keshav, Senior Manager of BSES Yamuna Power Limited/ Respondent No.2 is present through video conference. 7. On being asked, Mr. Rahul Keshav states that he is authorised to represent Respondent No.2 in the present proceedings. He reaffirms that the settled amount has been received and Respondent No.2 does not wish to pursue any proceedings arising out of the present FIR. He states that Respondent No.2 has no objection if the proceedings are quashed.

¶25

Offences under Section 135/138 of the Act are compoundable in nature.

¶26

The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Suresh Ganpati Halvankar v. The State of Maharashtra : Cr. Appeal No. 156/2018 has categorically held that the offences under Sections 135 and 138 of the Act are both compoundable in terms of Section 152 of the Act. It was held as under :

¶27

CRL.M.C. 1023/2025

¶28

Page 2 of 3

¶29

This is a digitally signed order.

¶30

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 31/07/2025 at 12:26:45

¶31

“We are of the view that this is correct in law inasmuch as the language of Section 152 specifically states ......”an offence of theft” which according to Stroud's Judicial Dictionary, as well as Ramanatha Iyer's Law Lexicon, states that one meaning of 'an' is 'any'. If the word 'any' is substituted for the word 'an' in Section 152, it becomes clear that any offence relating to the theft of electricity is also within the ken of Section 152. Section 138 also relates to theft of electricity, be it through maliciously injuring meters, and is therefore also within Section 152, and can therefore be compounded.”

¶32

Keeping in view the nature of dispute and that the parties have amicably entered into a settlement, this Court feels that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the dispute alive and continuance of the proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of Court. I am of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise discretionary jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

¶33

In view of the above, FIR No. 143/2023 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.

¶34

The present petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.

¶35

AMIT MAHAJAN, J

¶36

JULY 8, 2025 “SK”

¶37

Page 3 of 3

¶38

CRL.M.C. 1023/2025

¶39

This is a digitally signed order.

¶40

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 31/07/2025 at 12:26:45

Smt. Usha Singh v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Usha Singh v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sonu @ Sonu Rakwar & Ors. Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Harshit Kumar & Ors. Vs State of NCT Delhi & Anr.

Maksood Khan Vs the State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Subhash Chand Aggarwal & Ors. Vs State of N.C.T. of Delhi & Anr.

Romesh Sharma Vs State & Anr.

Shubham Chaturvedi Vs the State Govt of N C T of Delhi