JUDGMENT 1. - The instant criminal leave to appeal has been filed under Section 378 (1) and (4) of Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated 09.04.2013 whereby the learned Addl. Special Judge (Electricity Theft Cases) & Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Sriganganagar acquitted the respondent No.1 from the charge levelled against him under Section 135 of Electricity Act, 2003. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that finding given by the trial Court in the judgment impugned is totally perverse because by leading ample trustworthy evidence, prosecution has proved the case that the respondent No.1 is guilty of committing offence of electricity theft punishable under Section 135 of Electricity Act but on technical ground, the trial Court acquitted the respondent No.1 from the charge levelled against him, therefore, the judgment impugned may be quashed. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent vehemently opposed the prayer and submits that after full fledged trial in criminal complaint filed by the appellant on 13.09.2006 before the Judicial Magistrar (JD), Sri ganganagar, the Special Judge, (Electricity Theft Cases)& Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Sri ganganagar acquitted the respondent from the charge levelled against him under Section 135 of Electricity Act, therefore, no case is made out to grant leave to appeal. 4. Sessions Judge No.1, Sri ganganagar acquitted the respondent from the charge levelled against him under Section 135 of Electricity Act, therefore, no case is made out to grant leave to appeal. 4. I have considered the arguments and perused the finding given by the trial Court for acquittal, which reads as under:- " bl izdj.k esa ;g ,d Lohd`r rF; gS fd vfHk;qDr@izkFkhZ lkgcjke }kjk fnukad 21-8-2006 dks foHkkx dks vius ehVj dh tkap gsrq fyf[kr vkosnu fd;k Fkk fd mldh fctyh [kjkc gS o ,d Qst ugha vk jgk FkkA bl ij vfHk;qDr ds ehVj dh tkap ih0M0&2 d`".kdqekj }kjk dh x;h tks ih0M0&1 jktkjke ds ;gka izkFkhZ dh nj[okLr is'k djus ij mudks Hkstus ij dh x;h FkhA mUgksaus izn'kZ ih0&1 fjiksVZ ekSdk ij cuk;h tks fnukad 24-8-2006 dh gSA mudk ;g dFku gS fd mUgksaus ,e0vkj0vkbZ0 rFkk yksM losZ fy;k vkSj vkWfQl esa vkdj ,e0vkj0vkbZ0 ds MkVk dEI;wVj esa viyksM fd;s vkSj mlls izkIr VSEiMZ fjiksVZ lgk;d vfHk;ark izFke dks ,d dofjax ySVj ds lkFk fHktok;h x;h ysfdu mDr fjiksVZ vfHk;kstu i{k }kjk iznf'kZr ugha djok;h x;hA ewy dEI;wVj o lksQ~Vos;j rd dk Hkh crkSj otg lcwr U;k;ky; ds le{k is'k dj iznf'kZr ugha djok;k x;k gS rkfd U;k;ky; dks Hkh ;g irk pyrk fd fdlh izdkj ehVj esa ftruh ckj eSxzsV yxk;h tk;s ;k lh Vh vksiu dh tk;s rks ,sls MkVk vius vki lksQ~Vos;j crk ldrk gS ;k ughaA bl dkj.k U;k;ky; dks la'k; iSnk gksrk gSA bl laca/k esa fo}ku vf/koDrk cpko i{k }kjk Hkh gekjs le{k U;kf;d n`"Vkar bykgkckn mPp U;k;ky; dk is'k fd;k x;k gS ftlesa ;g vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k x;k gS fd lhVh@ihVh Qst esa ntZuksa dkj.kksa ls xfYr;ka gksrh gS] pksjh ds vijk/k dks lkfcr ugha ekuk x;k Fkk vkSj ehVj eSU;wQSpfjax dEiuh }kjk bl izdkj ds dEI;wVj dk fuekZ.k fd;k x;k gS rks mldk dksbZ rduhf'k;u Hkh U;k;ky; ds le{k is'k ugha gqvk tks U;k;ky; ds le{k lkfcr djrk fd fdl izdkj ls fo|qr pksjh dh x;h gSA izn'kZ ih&2 fnukad 30-8-2006 dks nwljk ehVj la[;k tsMhbZ 03797 yxk;s tkus ds ckjs esa fjiksVZ gSA foHkkx }kjk izn'kZ ih&3 ifjoknh ds [kkrk dh udy is'k dh x;h gSA foHkkx }kjk izkFkhZ dks dksbZ fMek.M uksfVl flfoy nkf;Ro ds lEcU/k esa ugha fn;k x;k gSA bl laca/k esa ih0M0&1 us ;g dFku fd;k gS fd ;g xyr gS fd gekjs foHkkx }kjk fMek.M uksfVl blfy, miHkksDrk dks u fn;k gks D;ksafd miHkksx esa dHkh dksbZ vUrj u vk;k gksA ;g ckr lgh gS fd eSaus tks jhfMax ds ckamMj is'k fd;s gSa] mldk voyksdu djus ls eSa jhfMax dk vUrj ugha crk ldrkA blls Li"V gS fd miHkksDrk }kjk ;fn dksbZ fo|qr pksjh dh tkrh rks mlds MkVk esa vUrj vo'; vkrkA izn'kZ ih&3 tks [kkrk ckabMj is'k fd;k gS] mlds voyksdu ls ;g tkfgj gksrk gS fd u;k ehVj yxus ds ckn Hkh miHkksDrk dh jhfMax igys ls de nf'kZr gks jgh gSA ,slh lwjr esa Hkh foHkkx dh dk;Zokgh lansgkLin izrhr gksrh gSA blds vfrfjDr foHkkx ds }kjk tkap ds le; miHkksDrk dks gkftj ugha j[kk o mlds le{k tkap ugha dh o u gh mls dksbZ uksfVl gh fn;kA ogt lcwr Hkh is'k ugha fd;s x;sA ,slh lwjr esa miq;ZDr leLr ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa izLrqr U;k; n`"Vkarksa ds izdk'k esa vfHk;kstu i{k dk ekeyk lansgkLin gS vkSj vfHk;kstu i{k vfHk;qDr ds f[kykQ vkjksfir vijk/k lansg ls ijs lkfcr ugha dj ik;k gS vr% vfHk;qDr lkgcjke dks vkjksfir vijk/k ls lansg dk ykHk nsdj nks"keqDr djuk mfpr izrhr gksrk gSA " 5. After perusing the aforesaid finding, I am of the opinion that complainant has completely failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt because the report upon which complaint filed was not exhibited in trial so also no other material evidence is produced, therefore, the trial Court has rightly acquitted the respondent from the charge levelled against him under Section 135 of Electricity Act. In view of above facts, no case is made out for interference in the finding given by the trial Court to acquit the respondent from the charges levelled against him. Hence, this criminal leave to appeal is hereby dismissed.Leave to appeal dismissed. *******