Allahabad High Court · 2025

S.K.Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Ms. Usha Kiran, learend counsel for opposite party no.2 and Sri Rakesh Kumar Mishra, learned AGA for the State.

2. The instant application has been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceeding of S.S.T. No. 77 of 2013 under Sections 138 Electricity Act arising out of Crime No. 87 of 2012, P.S. Anwarganj, District Kanpur Nagar, pending before the court of Electricity Act, Kanpur Nagar.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the case of the opposite party no.2 as per the FIR is that on 17.01.2012, the officers of the KESCO inspected the premises of the applicant herein and found that earlier his electricity connection was temporarily disconnected. However, on the date of inspection, it was found and he had reconnected the electricity connection and as per the FIR, an amount of Rs.1,47,118.00 was due on the date of inspection against the applicant. The matter was investigated and the charge sheet was filed in the instant case, on which the cognizance has already been taken by the trial court vide order dated 06.02.2013. Being aggrieved by the same, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant seeking quashing of the entire proceeding of the instant case against the applicant herein.

4. The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that at no point of time, the electricity connection was ever granted by the KESCO to the applicant herein nor any electricity line was laid to the premises of the applicant. Therefore, there was no question of temporary disconnection for want of dues as alleged in the FIR. Therefore, the instant FIR has been lodged on the basis of imaginary and concocted facts. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has applied for information under the RTI Act asking the KESCO to provide the details of electricity connection provided to the applicant and the line laid in the premises of the applicant; any temporary disconnection done and on what date by the KESCO. The KESCO has failed to provide any such information despite repeated applications and for non-supply of the information so demanded by the applicant, a fine of Rs. 25,000/- was imposed on the KESCO for non-supply of the information.

5. The instant application was filed in the year 2016. However, the counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the opposite party no.2 after eight years, in which it has been informed that on 01.11.2004, a connection was granted in favour of the applicant herein. The document has been filed as annexure-1 to the counter affidavit disclosing the said connection. However, in the same document, it is stated against the electricity connection status- 'permanent disconnection without dues'.

6. In view thereof, learned counsel for the applicant submits that no electricity line was laid in the premises of the applicant and even if the said document which is annexed as annexure-1 to the counter affidavit to its face value, the status of the electricity connection granted to the applicant was permanent disconnection without dues and it means that there was no dues towards the applicant at any point of time specifically at the time of registration of the FIR or the inspection done by the officers of the KESCO. Wherefrom the figure of dues of Rs.1,47,118.00 was taken in the FIR, is not known. The FIR was lodged after two months from the alleged inspection on

17.01.2012. Therefore, learned counsel for the applicant submits that no case is made out against the applicant from the entire material available on record and he seeks quashing of the entire proceeding of the instant case.

7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the KESCO submits that initially the electricity connection no. 6079/026422 was granted to the applicant herein on

16.09.2004. However, the same was granted without meter as per the policy of the KESCO and against this connection, the meter no. LF-9999 was opened as per the rules of the KESCO. Thus, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 supports the allegations as made in the FIR and submits that the matter was investigated and the charge sheet has already been filed against the applicant. Therefore, no case is made out for quashing of the proceeding as a prima facie case is established from the material available on record.

8. However, on specific query by the Court, learned counsel for the applicant failed to disclose any date of temporary disconnection as alleged in the FIR nor any document supporting the same is produced along with the counter affidavit.

9. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, from the document annexure-1 to the counter affidavit, it is apparent that there were no dues on the part of the applicant and it is not the case that any amount has been paid by the applicant to the KESCO after the registration of the FIR. Therefore, from the own document of the KESCO, it is apparent that there are no dues. Therefore, the very basis of the FIR is not established.

10. In view thereof, in the considered opinion of this Court, the instant case is nothing but a malicious prosecution on the part of the opposite party no.2, therefore, and thus the instant application under Section 482 is allowed and the entire proceedings of S.S.T. No. 77 of 2013 under Sections 138 Electricity Act arising out of Crime No. 87 of 2012, P.S. Anwarganj, District Kanpur Nagar, are hereby quashed. Order Date :- 8.7.2025 Ashish Pd. (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) SHUBHAM ARYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

S.K.Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Ms. Usha Kiran, learend counsel for opposite party no.2 and Sri Rakesh Kumar Mishra, learned AGA for the State.

2. The instant application has been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceeding of S.S.T. No. 77 of 2013 under Sections 138 Electricity Act arising out of Crime No. 87 of 2012, P.S. Anwarganj, District Kanpur Nagar, pending before the court of Electricity Act, Kanpur Nagar.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the case of the opposite party no.2 as per the FIR is that on 17.01.2012, the officers of the KESCO inspected the premises of the applicant herein and found that earlier his electricity connection was temporarily disconnected. However, on the date of inspection, it was found and he had reconnected the electricity connection and as per the FIR, an amount of Rs.1,47,118.00 was due on the date of inspection against the applicant. The matter was investigated and the charge sheet was filed in the instant case, on which the cognizance has already been taken by the trial court vide order dated 06.02.2013. Being aggrieved by the same, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant seeking quashing of the entire proceeding of the instant case against the applicant herein.

4. The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that at no point of time, the electricity connection was ever granted by the KESCO to the applicant herein nor any electricity line was laid to the premises of the applicant. Therefore, there was no question of temporary disconnection for want of dues as alleged in the FIR. Therefore, the instant FIR has been lodged on the basis of imaginary and concocted facts. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has applied for information under the RTI Act asking the KESCO to provide the details of electricity connection provided to the applicant and the line laid in the premises of the applicant; any temporary disconnection done and on what date by the KESCO. The KESCO has failed to provide any such information despite repeated applications and for non-supply of the information so demanded by the applicant, a fine of Rs. 25,000/- was imposed on the KESCO for non-supply of the information.

5. The instant application was filed in the year 2016. However, the counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the opposite party no.2 after eight years, in which it has been informed that on 01.11.2004, a connection was granted in favour of the applicant herein. The document has been filed as annexure-1 to the counter affidavit disclosing the said connection. However, in the same document, it is stated against the electricity connection status- 'permanent disconnection without dues'.

6. In view thereof, learned counsel for the applicant submits that no electricity line was laid in the premises of the applicant and even if the said document which is annexed as annexure-1 to the counter affidavit to its face value, the status of the electricity connection granted to the applicant was permanent disconnection without dues and it means that there was no dues towards the applicant at any point of time specifically at the time of registration of the FIR or the inspection done by the officers of the KESCO. Wherefrom the figure of dues of Rs.1,47,118.00 was taken in the FIR, is not known. The FIR was lodged after two months from the alleged inspection on

17.01.2012. Therefore, learned counsel for the applicant submits that no case is made out against the applicant from the entire material available on record and he seeks quashing of the entire proceeding of the instant case.

7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the KESCO submits that initially the electricity connection no. 6079/026422 was granted to the applicant herein on

16.09.2004. However, the same was granted without meter as per the policy of the KESCO and against this connection, the meter no. LF-9999 was opened as per the rules of the KESCO. Thus, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 supports the allegations as made in the FIR and submits that the matter was investigated and the charge sheet has already been filed against the applicant. Therefore, no case is made out for quashing of the proceeding as a prima facie case is established from the material available on record.

8. However, on specific query by the Court, learned counsel for the applicant failed to disclose any date of temporary disconnection as alleged in the FIR nor any document supporting the same is produced along with the counter affidavit.

9. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, from the document annexure-1 to the counter affidavit, it is apparent that there were no dues on the part of the applicant and it is not the case that any amount has been paid by the applicant to the KESCO after the registration of the FIR. Therefore, from the own document of the KESCO, it is apparent that there are no dues. Therefore, the very basis of the FIR is not established.

10. In view thereof, in the considered opinion of this Court, the instant case is nothing but a malicious prosecution on the part of the opposite party no.2, therefore, and thus the instant application under Section 482 is allowed and the entire proceedings of S.S.T. No. 77 of 2013 under Sections 138 Electricity Act arising out of Crime No. 87 of 2012, P.S. Anwarganj, District Kanpur Nagar, are hereby quashed. Order Date :- 8.7.2025 Ashish Pd. (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) SHUBHAM ARYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad