Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 2118 (RAJ)

Kasuri v. State of Rajasthan

2013-11-27

SANDEEP MEHTA

body2013
JUDGMENT 1. - The instant misc. petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking quashing of the F.I.R. No. 60/2013, registered at the Police Station APTPS Barmer, Distt. Barmer for the offences under Sections 135 and 138 of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the F.I.R. impugned filed by the respondent No. 2, the Executive Engineer, JVVNL, Barmer against the petitioner is mala fide and without any justification. He submits that the F.I.R. is belated by one and a half year. He submits that there is no allegation in the F.I.R. impugned regarding the meter being tampered with. Learned Counsel further submits that the notice of civil liability has been stayed by this Court in writ jurisdiction. He thus prays that the F.I.R. impugned deserves to be quashed. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned Counsel for the respondent No. 2 vehemently opposed the submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioner. It is pointed out that the F.I.R. itself recites that the petitioner was given repeated notices for appearing so that the meter could be tested in her presence, but, she did not appear either herself or through her representative. It is also submitted that the meter was found without seals upon inspection and when the same was tested in the meter lab in the presence of the committee members of the Company, the meter was found to be tampered with. It is thus submitted that the F.I.R. impugned discloses commission of offences under Sections 135 and 138 of the Indian Electricity Act against the petitioner. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned Counsel for the respondent No. 2 thus pray that no interference is warranted by this Court in the F.I.R. impugned. 4. Heard and considered the arguments advanced at the bar and perused the F.I.R. impugned. 5. From a bare perusal of the F.I.R. impugned. It is evident that the arguments which have been raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner are per se misconceived. The F.I.R. specifically bears the allegations that the meter which was affixed in the commercial premises of the petitioner was tampered with. It is evident that the delay in filing the F.I.R. was occasioned due to non cooperation of the petitioner with the Company in the process of testing the meter. The F.I.R. specifically bears the allegations that the meter which was affixed in the commercial premises of the petitioner was tampered with. It is evident that the delay in filing the F.I.R. was occasioned due to non cooperation of the petitioner with the Company in the process of testing the meter. The argument raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the notice of civil liability has been stayed by this Court in writ jurisdiction is also of no avail to the petitioner because the F.I.R. impugned has been filed with the specific allegation of tampering with the meter. The allegation has been verified by the Meter Testing Laboratory. Thus, this Court is of the opinion that at this stage, it cannot be said that the F.I.R. impugned does not disclose any cognizable offences against the petitioner so as to quash the same by exercising inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.Accordingly, this misc. petition as well as the stay petition being bereft of any force are hereby dismissed.Petition dismissed. *******