Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2017 DIGILAW 1048 (SC)

Bhola Ram v. State of Chhattisgarh

2017-07-14

J.CHELAMESWAR, S.ABDUL NAZEER

body2017
JUDGMENT : J. Chelameswar, S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ. Leave granted. 2. The appellant was convicted for the offence under section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mungeli, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) vide order dated 13th August, 2002 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. The appellant challenged the said order by filing Criminal Appeal No. 275 of 2002 before the Second Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Tract Court) Mungeli, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh and the Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal by his order dated 11th May, 2004. The said order was challenged by the appellant by filing a Criminal Revision No. 285 of 2004 before the High Court of Chhattisgarh. The High Court by order dated 8th December, 2016 dismissed the revision filed by the appellant. The appellant has called in question the legality and correctness of the said order in this appeal. 3. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties, we do not find any merit in this appeal. The Courts below, on appreciation of the entire evidence on record have come to a conclusion that the appellant has committed the offence of theft of electricity by taking direct line from the electricity board for which he was not authorized and thereby committed the theft of electricity. 4. At this stage, learned Counsel for the appellant submits that having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, leniency may be shown to the appellant by imposing lesser sentence. It is evident that the matter is pending for the last over 21 years. The appellant was a resident of a remote village in the State of Chhattisgarh. He was running a Haulier Mill in the said village and committed theft of electricity. It is not a case of the respondents that the appellant has not paid the electricity charges and the penally. Keeping in mind the mitigating circumstances, it is just and proper to impose a lesser punishment. In our view, the appellant should be sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of one month and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/-. 5. The appeal is accordingly disposed of with the conclusion that the appellant is convicted for the offence punishable under section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 and is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of one month and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. 5. The appeal is accordingly disposed of with the conclusion that the appellant is convicted for the offence punishable under section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 and is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of one month and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- if not already paid in terms of the order of the Magistrate. In default of payment of fine, the appellant shall undergo further rigorous imprisonment of fifteen days. The appellant is entitled to the benefit of set off under section 428 of Cr.P.C., 1973. 6. The appellant shall surrender before the authorities concerned to serve the sentence within a period of six weeks from today.