JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal is directed against the judgment dated June 7, 1978 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sardarshahar, acquitting the accused respondent for the offence under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). 2. The prosecution case in brief was that on July 10, 1976, a raid was arranged by Shri Bhanwar Lal Sharma, the Assistant Engineer, R.S.E.B.. Sardar Shahar. on the premises of Shri Kiran Singh Narain Singh of Sardar Shahar where a flour mill was installed. As a result of the inspection made by of the power-meter, it was found that the meter had been tempered with. After investigation, a challan was filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Sardar Shahar where the accused were charged for the offence under Section 379, I.P.C. and Section 39 of the Act. 3. After trial the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused of the charges levelled against him. The Learned Magistrate held that the accused himself was an employee of the Corporation and at the time of checking he was on duty, and, that the inspection was held in his absence. The Learned Magistrate further held that the prosecution had failed to prove that the power connection was in the name of the accused and even if it be so held, the prosecution had failed to prove that the meter in question was in any way tempered with, and, that the electricity was stolen by the accused. The accused was acquitted by giving the benefit of doubt as there was found to be no evidence against him. 4. I have heard Shri N.C. Bhati, learned Public Prosecutor for the state and Shri S.R. Singhi & Shri Suresh Kumbhat for the accused. The learned Public Prosecutor was unable to assail the aforesaid findings. He was not having in his possession his office file of the case. He was, therefore, supplied the Court file and was asked to point out any evidence which could show that the accused was in any way connected with the electricity installation at the premises where the flour mill was installed. Learned Public Prosecutor was also unable to show that the flour-mill and the power-meter was in the possession of the accused, or was under his control at the relevant time. Learned Public Prosecutor was also unable to show that the flour-mill and the power-meter was in the possession of the accused, or was under his control at the relevant time. I do not find any grounds much less compelling reasons for interference with the order of acquittal passed against the accused. The prosecution witness Lal Singh in terms admitted in cross-examination that at the time of inspection, the seal of the power meter was intact. The witness was not declared hostile. P.W. 5 Nathu has also stated that the seal of the meter was broken by the raiding-party. As against this, no evidence has been shown to establish that when the premises were inspected, the seal of the power meter had already been broken. 5. In the result, there is no substance in the appeal and the some is hereby dismissed.Appeal dismissed. *******