Allowed

Lal Babu Mian and Ors. v. State of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC14 Sept 2012CR. MISC./21389/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court allowed a petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash cognizance taken in a theft of electricity case. Since the petitioners deposited the compounding amount under Section 152 of the Electricity Act, the order of cognizance and subsequent proceedings were set aside, and petitioners were discharged from bail bonds.

What did the court decide?

Order of cognizance dated 18-12-2008 set aside; entire case proceedings quashed; petitioners discharged from bail bond.

Lal Babu Mian and Ors. Vs State of Bihar and Anr. — Property and Title | Patna HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 21389 of 2010

¶3

================================================== 1. Lal Babu Mian Son of Mosaheb Mian. 2. Satendra Chaurasia Son of Ram Bachan Chaurasia. 3. Mustak Mian Son of Late Fajalu Rahman, All resident of Village :- Inerwa, P.S:- Adapur, District :- East Champaran. .... .... Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Bihar Electricity Board, Through Chairman Bihar, Patna. .... .... Opposite Parties. ================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 4. 14-09-2012 Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Vijay Kumar Verma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no. 2/ Bihar State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as “Board”).

¶4

Three petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have prayed for quashing of an order dated 18-12-2008 passed in Adapur P. S. Case No. 100 of 2008 by learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Raxaul at Motihari. By the said order, learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of offence under Sections 379 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code and 135 of the Electricity Act.

¶5

The petitioners were made accused on an

¶6

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21389 of 2010 (4) dt.14-09-2012

¶7

2 / 3

¶8

allegation of committing theft of electricity from L. T. Supply line by means of tapping and has caused revenue loss to the Electricity Board to the tune of Rs. 1,875/-. After investigation, charge-sheet was submitted and thereafter, learned Magistrate, by the impugned order, has taken cognizance of the offence.

¶9

In this case, on 04-03-2011, on the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners, case was adjourned to enable the petitioners to appear before the compounding board for settlement of the bill.

¶10

By way of filing supplementary affidavit, it has been asserted by learned counsel for the petitioners that they have appeared before the compounding board of the Bihar State Electricity Board and deposited Rs. 4,000/-, in terms of Section 152 of the Electricity Act. It was asserted by learned counsel for the petitioners that since the compounding amount has already been deposited by the petitioners in terms of Section 152(2) of the Electricity Act, further proceeding in the case may not be allowed.

¶11

The submission made by learned counsel for the

¶12

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21389 of 2010 (4) dt.14-09-2012

¶13

3 / 3

¶14

petitioners regarding depositing of compounding amount was not disputed by Sri Vijay Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the Board.

¶15

In view of the fact that compounding amount has already been paid by the petitioners, in terms of subsection 2 to Section 152 of the Electricity Act, no further proceeding before the court below can be allowed to proceed and as such, the present petition stands allowed and order of cognizance dated 18-12-2008 passed in Adapur P. S. Case No. 100 of 2008 by learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Raxaul at Motihari is, hereby, set aside as well as entire proceeding in the said case is also set aside.

¶16

It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that all the petitioners are on bail. In view of the fact that the criminal proceeding has already been set aside, petitioners are directed to be discharged from their bailbond.

¶17

(Rakesh Kumar, J.)

¶18

Anay

Lal Babu Mian and Ors. v. State of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lal Babu Mian and Ors. v. State of Bihar and Anr.

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

Sri Kanteshwar Maitry @ Lalanji Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Subhash Beriwal and Anr. Vs State of Bihar and Anr.

Gopal Singh @ Gopal Kumar Singh and Ors. Vs Satte of Bihar and Anr.

Rajesh Pathak and Anr. Vs State of Bihar and Anr.

Md.Salatansari @ Md.Salauddin Ansari and Ors. Vs State of Bihar

Ajay Kumar Sinha Vs State of Bihar and Anr.