examined. P.W. 2 – Bajrangi Choubey is the informant who has deposed about the raid conduced in the premises of the petitioner. P.W. 3 – Nawal Kishore Sharma is the I.O. of the case who has recorded the statements of the witnesses in course of investigation. Apart from the oral evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution, the seizure list was accepted as exhibit 2 which proves that the motor of 5 H.P. of E.C.E. Company, belts, a damaged meter and crushed wheat and Ata Chaki were recovered from the premises where an Ice cream factory was also being run by the petitioner by having direct connection. The petitioner had failed to bring on record any material to suggest that there has been any sanction of the electricity board with respect to using a load of 5 H.P. The prosecution therefore had proved its case beyond any reasonable doubt with respect to such act which caused loss to the electricity board which has been committed by the petitioner. The circumstances, enumerated above do suggest that the learned trial court as well as the appellate court on proper appreciation of the materials on record has rightly convicted the petitioner. There being no infirmity or illegality in the judgment of conviction, this court is not inclined to interfere with the same.
