Safety Shoes Used as Weapon Meets Mens Rea Requirement for Murder: Rajasthan HC on Bail Denial    |     Right to Be Considered for Promotion, Not a Right to Promotion: Supreme Court Clarifies Eligibility for Retrospective Promotion    |     Inherent Power of Courts Can Recall Admission of Insufficiently Stamped Documents: Supreme Court    |     Courts Cannot Substitute Their Opinion for Security Agencies in Threat Perception Assessments: J&K High Court Directs Reassessment of Political Leader's Threat Perception    |     Service Law | Violation of Natural Justice: Discharge Without Notice or Reason: Gauhati High Court Orders Reinstatement and Regularization of Circle Organizers    |     Jharkhand High Court Quashes Family Court Order, Reaffirms Jurisdiction Based on Minor’s Ordinary Residence in Delhi    |     Ex-Serviceman Status Ceases After First Employment in Government Job: Calcutta High Court Upholds SBI’s Cancellation of Ex-Serviceman's Appointment Over False Declaration of Employment    |     Maxim Res Ipsa Loquitur Applies When State Instrumentalities Are Directly Responsible: Delhi High Court Orders MCD to Pay ₹10 Lakhs Compensation for Death    |     Wilful Avoidance of Service Must Be Established Before Passing Ex Parte Order Under Section 126(2) CrPC: Patna High Court Sets Aside Ex Parte Maintenance Order    |     MP High Court Imposes Rs. 10,000 Costs for Prolonging Litigation, Upholds Eviction of Petitioners from Father's Property    |     When Detention Unnecessary Despite Serious Allegations of Fraud Bail Should be Granted: Kerala HC    |     Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Relocation Alone Cannot Justify Transfer: Supreme Court Rejects Plea to Move Case from Nellore to Delhi, Orders Fresh Probe    |     Punjab & Haryana HC Double Bench Upholds Protection for Married Partners in Live-In Relationships, Denies Same for Minors    |    

High Court Dismisses Petition in Electricity Theft Case, Directs Special Court to Expedite Trial: No Irregularity in Procedure

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, presided over by the Honorable Mr. Justice R. Sakthivel, dismissed a criminal original petition challenging the jurisdiction in an electricity theft case. The Court, in its judgment, directed the Special Court in Tuticorin to dispose of the matter expeditiously, setting a deadline of April 26, 2024.

The case, registered as Crl.O.P.(MD) No.22491 of 2018, involves the petitioner, Jeyaprakash, accused of stealing a substantial amount of electricity for his ice factory. The prosecution estimated the theft at 3,30,180 units of electricity, translating to a financial loss of Rs.33,84,345/- to TANGEDCO.

The petitioner sought to quash the proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, citing jurisdictional errors and arguing the applicability of Section 126 over Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003. However, the court found substantial merit in the prosecution’s argument, underscoring the petitioner’s previous similar offenses.

In his observation, Justice R. Sakthivel stated, “This Court does not find any irregularity by the Special Court in taking cognizance in the aforementioned manner.” He emphasized that the Special Court’s decision to proceed under Section 135 of the Electricity Act was justified, considering the evidence and the nature of the offense.

The defense’s claim of impossibility to use an agricultural connection for industrial purposes was also addressed. The Court carefully considered the submissions from both sides, including the detailed investigation report and the testimonies recorded.

 Date of Decision: 18/01/2024

Jeyaprakash VS State rep by Inspector of Police

 

Similar News