MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Seals Of  Iron Box As Well As The Meter Were Found Intact By The Flying Squad As Admitted: Punjab And Haryana High Court Rejects Claims Of Meter Tampering Due To Lack Of Evidence

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Punjab and Haryana has dismissed an appeal by the Punjab State Electricity Board (PSEB) against concurrent findings of the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court regarding alleged tampering of an electricity meter at the respondent’s cotton factory. The judgment, delivered by Justice Alka Sarin, upheld that there was no substantive evidence of tampering, and the seals on the meter and its metal box were found intact, rendering the demand notice for Rs. 51,848/- invalid.

Background:The case originated when a Flying Squad from PSEB inspected the respondent Madan Lal’s cotton factory and alleged that the electricity meter had been tampered with, claiming the meter reading was reversed and the glass was scratched. Consequently, PSEB issued a demand notice for Rs. 51,848/-. Madan Lal challenged this notice in court, and both the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court ruled in his favor, finding no substantial evidence of tampering. PSEB then appealed to the High Court.

Intact Seals on Meter and Metal Box: The court emphasized the importance of the intact seals on both the meter and its metal box. “The seals of the iron box as well as the meter were found intact by the Flying Squad as admitted even by the witnesses of the defendant-appellants,” noted Justice Sarin. This critical observation undermined the appellants’ claim of tampering.

Lack of Evidence of Glass Tampering: Addressing the claims of tampering, Justice Sarin remarked, “There was no material on the record to even remotely suggest that there was any tampering with the glass.” The appellants had argued that the meter reading was reversed and the glass was scratched. However, these claims were unsupported by corroborative evidence. The court noted that scratches on the glass alone were insufficient to prove tampering.

Witness Testimonies: The court scrutinized the testimony of DW2 Balwinder Singh, a member of the Flying Squad, who alleged tampering. However, the court found his statements unconvincing due to the lack of corroborating evidence. “The statement of DW2 regarding reversed meter reading considered insufficient without corroborative evidence,” the judgment stated.

The court’s legal reasoning focused on the absence of substantial evidence and the intact condition of the seals. The judgment stated, “Both the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court found that the meter was installed in a metal box with intact seals. No evidence was provided to support claims of glass tampering.”

Justice Sarin highlighted the significance of evidence in such cases: “No question of law, much less any substantial question of law, arises in the present case. The appeal being devoid of any merit is accordingly dismissed.”

The dismissal of the appeal by the High Court reinforces the importance of concrete evidence in claims of meter tampering. By upholding the findings of the lower courts, this judgment underscores the judiciary’s commitment to basing decisions on clear and convincing evidence. This decision not only validates the respondent’s stance but also sets a precedent for similar cases, emphasizing that mere allegations without substantial proof cannot stand in a court of law.

Date of Decision: 31st May 2024

P.S.E.B Patiala and Anr. Vs. Madan Lal

Latest Legal News