Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 67 (MP)

Bhagwandas Tiwari v. State of M. P.

2011-01-17

AJIT SINGH, SANJAY YADAV

body2011
ORDER 1. Heard on admission. 2. By this petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the Petitioner has prayed for quashing of judgment dated 10-8-2010, Annexure P4. passed in Special Case No. 1/2007 by the Special Court. (Electricity Act). Khandwa, insofar as it relates to determining his civil liability. 3. On 26-4-2006 a team of Vigilance Cell of Madhya Pradesh Western Area Electricity Distribution Company, Khandwa, during inspection found the Petitioner committing theft of electricity for the purposes of running a motor grinding mill (Chakki). The Petitioner was, therefore, prosecuted for offences under Sections 135 and 138 of the Indian Electricity Act (in short, "the Act") in the Special Court. The Special Court by judgment dated 10-8-2010 convicted the Petitioner under Sections 135 and 138 of the Act and sentenced him for a period of six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- on both counts. The Special Court also determined the civil liability of Rs. 1,05,075.94 against the Petitioner. Aggrieved, the Petitioner has filed Criminal Appeal No. 1715/2010 in the High Court which is pending. Along with the appeal, he also filed two applications - one for suspension of sentence and the other for staying the operation of judgment to the extent it relates to civil liablity. A learned Single Judge by order dated 8-9-2010, Annexure P5, has admitted the criminal appeal for final hearing. The learned Judge has also allowed the application for suspension of sentence but dismissed the application in respect of civil liability of the Petitioner with a liberty for its filing before the appropriate forum. It appears that the learned Single Judge was of the view that in criminal appeal, no relief can be granted to the Petitioner against the determination of civil liability by the Special Court. It is in this background the Petitioner has filed the present petition. 4. The question, therefore, which calls for our consideration is whether the High Court, while exercising powers of an appellate Court conferred under Section 156 of the Act, can interfere with the finding of civil liability arrived at by the Special Court against a person in terms of money for theft of electricity. 5. Part XV of the Act deals with Special Courts and appellate and revisional powers of the High Court against the judgment or order of Special Court. 5. Part XV of the Act deals with Special Courts and appellate and revisional powers of the High Court against the judgment or order of Special Court. Section 153 provides for the constitution of Special Courts by the State Government to ensure speedy trial of offences referred to in Sections 135 to 139. Section 154 states about the procedure and power of Special Court. 6. The relevant extract of Section 154 reads as under: 154. Procedure and power of Special Court.- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974). every offence punishable under Sections 135 to 139 shall be triable only by the Special Court within whose jurisdiction such offence has been committed. (5) The Special Court may determine the civil liability against a consumer or a person in terms of money for theft of energy which shall not be less than an amount equivalent to two times of the tariff rate applicable for a period of twelve months preceding the date of detection of theft of energy or the exact period of theft if determined whichever is less and the amount of civil liability so determined shall be recovered as if it were a decree of civil Court. 7. Section 155 of the Act provides for the powers of Special Court and it reads as under: 155. Special Court to have powers of Court of Session.- Save as otherwise provided in this Act, the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), insofar as they are not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, shall apply to the proceedings before the Special Court and for the purpose of the provisions of the said enactments, the Special Court shall be deemed to be a Court of Session and shall have all powers of a Court of Session and the person conducting a prosecution before the Special Court shall be deemed to be a Public Prosecutor. Section 156 of the Act also reads as under: 156. Section 156 of the Act also reads as under: 156. Appeal and revision.- The High Court may exercise, so far as may be applicable, all the powers conferred by Chapters XXIX and XXX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), as if the Special Court within the local limits of the jurisdiction of the High Court is a District Court, or as the case may be, the Court of Session, trying cases within the local limits of jurisdiction of the High Court. 8. The trial before the Special Court is one composite trial for the determination of the offence and also for the civil liability. The Special Court under Section 155 of the Act quoted above is deemed to be a Court of Session under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, "the Code of Criminal Procedure"). There are provisions such as Section 257 in the Code of Criminal Procedure where a criminal Court is given power to determine civil liability of providing compensation. The Special Court similarly although a criminal Court and deemed to be a Court of Session under Section 155 of the Act has been given power to determine the civil liability against a consumer. It is to be noted that under Section 155 a Special Court is deemed to be a Court of Session and is authorized to exercise powers under the Code of Criminal Procedure which are not inconsistent with the provisions of the Act. But it is nowhere deemed to be a civil Court or a District Court under the Code of Civil Procedure (in short, "the Code of Civil Procedure"). 9. The provision of appeal and revision under Section 156 of the Act quoted above provides that the High Court may exercise all the powers under Chapters XXIX and XXX of the Code of Criminal Procedure as if the Special Court within the local limits of its jurisdiction is a District Court or as the case may be the Court of Session. The section does not in any way provide that the High Court will have the power of appeal or revision under the Code of Civil Procedure against the order of the Special Court. The Civil liability determined by the Special Court is dependent upon the criminal liability. The section does not in any way provide that the High Court will have the power of appeal or revision under the Code of Civil Procedure against the order of the Special Court. The Civil liability determined by the Special Court is dependent upon the criminal liability. If a person concerned is acquitted of the offence in appeal for which he is convicted, the civil liablity will also have to be set aside. This also indicates that there cannot be two proceedings in an appeal one against the conviction and the other against the civil liability. The whole case has to be heard together or else difficulty in the disposal of appeal will occur. It is only when the civil liability determined by the Special Court becomes final and the amount is not paid by the consumer, it is deemed to be a decree of a civil Court for its recovery under Section 154(5) of the Act. But from this provision it cannot be inferred that there can be two separate proceedings in appeal before the High Court, one under the Code of Criminal Procedure and the other under Code of Civil Procedure. The expression "District Court" occurring in Section 156 of the Act also refers to the Sessions Court because under Section 7 of the Code of Criminal Procedure every sessions division is a district and the Sessions Court can also be described as a District Court for the purposes of Code of Criminal Procedure The expression "District Court" cannot be construed to mean a Court of the District Judge under the Code of Civil Procedure because there is no reference whatsoever to the Code of Civil Procedure in Section 156 of the Act and the only powers the High Court can exercise are those conferred by Chapters XXIX and XXX of the Code of Criminal Procedure The words "as the case may be" as they occur in Section 156 of the Act appear to be redundant and their presence in the section is apparently a result of bad drafting. It is well settled that in discharging its interpretative function, the Court can correct obvious drafting errors and so in suitable cases "the Court will add words, or omit words or substitute words" (See Principles of Statutory Interpretation by Justice G. P. Sing, 12th Edition, page 78). It is well settled that in discharging its interpretative function, the Court can correct obvious drafting errors and so in suitable cases "the Court will add words, or omit words or substitute words" (See Principles of Statutory Interpretation by Justice G. P. Sing, 12th Edition, page 78). We, therefore, hold that the High Court While dealing with the criminal appeal against the conviction can also deal with the finding of civil liability determined by the special Court and can even pass appropriate interlocutory orders on the question of its recovery. Thus, the Petitioner is at liberty to apply afresh in the criminal appeal for an appropriate interim relief. The petition stands finally disposed of.