ORDER K.C. Gupta, J. - This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing order dated 9.8.2002 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad in case bearing FIR No. 278 dated 11.7.1987 under Sections 379/420/406/409/160/161/120B Indian Penal Code read with Section 5/2/47 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 39 of the Electricity Act, registered at Police Station, Central Faridabad. 2. Report was lodged with the police on 8.7.1987 by the Director, Vigilance and Security, H.S.E.B. Chandigarh to the effect that theft on a large scale of electric energy through corrupt means had been detected. It was alleged that the meters installed in the premises of consumers and those in the feeders/Sub Stations were giving different reading of electricity consumed and electricity supplied. Infact, there was 7% variation which was a clear cut proof of theft of electric energy by the consumers in connivance with the Boards staff. The various premises of the consumers were checked and records were examined for the period from January, 1986 to January, 1987 and the loss to HSEB was found to the tune of Rs. 16,89,442.25. 3. After the completion of investigation, challan was put up in the Court. The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad after hearing learned counsel for the parties, vide order dated 21.9.1995 found a prima-facie case against accused Nos. 5, 6, 7, 22, 23, 24, 58, 65, 72, 73, 79 and 80 only and discharged the other accused. The employees of the HSEB were discharged for want of sanction. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, HSEB filed revision petition, which was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad vide order dated 9.8.2002. 5. The State of Haryana has filed the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 6. I have heard counsel for the State of Haryana Sh. Sudhir Nehra, AAG Haryana, Sarvshri Ashit Malik, Anil Shukla and Sanjiv Pabbi, Advocates and also have gone through the file. 7. The learned State counsel has relied upon Krishan Pal Singh Chauhan v. State of Haryana, 1997(4) RCR(Criminal) 683 to contend that if there was a prima facie case, charge could be framed even on weak evidence without caring whether it would result in conviction or acquittal of accused. There is no doubt about the proposition of law laid down in that case. There is no doubt about the proposition of law laid down in that case. However, in the present case, I find that there is absolutely no evidence on the file that any of the consumer challaned has committed theft of electricity. It has been held by Honble Apex Court in Ram Chandra Prasad Sharma and others v. State of Bihar and another, AIR 1967 Supreme Court 349 that presence of a perfected artificial means to render abstraction of emergy possible must be established. It has been further observed that mere allegation about tampering of meter and control of accused over it is not sufficient. In the present case, there is a report Annexure R-1 of the Xen M & P Divn. Faridabad dated 23.12.1987 which he had made after checking of the meters, during the year 1987. He, on checking, found most of the meters to be OK but some other meters could not be checked as the premises were closed and some more meters, were found running fast. One or two meters were found running slow. Thus, the prosecution has not produced any documentary evidence or otherwise that the respondents had committed theft of electricity by tampering the meters or in any other manner. Thus, it cannot be said that there was dishonest abstraction of energy. There is no illegality or impropriety in the impugned order of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad dated 9.8.2002. Hence, no case is made out to quash the said order under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code Consequently, the petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed.