Smt. Swaran Virk vs State of Haryana

Nirmal Singh, J.—This is a petition u/s 482 Cr. PC for quashing FIR No.429 dated 25.4.1998 registered at P.S. Karnal for an offence u/s 379 IPC and u/s 39 of the Electricity Act and for quashing all the consequent proceedings.

The petitioner is resident of House No.22, Maya Puri, Karnal having consumer No.LC-14/2592. The said premises were cheeked by Sh. K.L. Jawa, AEE on 20.4.1998. On checking it was found that the board of electricity energy was being abstracted illegally and dishonestly. On the basis of the checking report, case against the petitioner was registered. Notice of assessment under Clause 24 of the terms and conditions of supply was issued by S.D.O. City Sub Division, Haryana State Electricity Board, Karnal to the petitioner. As per the assessment order dated 24.4.1998, petitioner was asked to deposit Rs.72,788/- as compensation within seven days from the date of receipt of copy of assessment order.

Mr. Jagat Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Haryana State Electricity Board has taken a decision (Vide Annexure P-5) that if any pilferage or theft of electricity was detected by the Board and the offender comes forward voluntarily to settle and make the payment of the amount, then the criminal proceedings are not to be initiated. He further submitted that the Board has further decided that this criteria is applicable in those cases also, where FIR has already been registered. He also submitted that as per this decision, the FIR already registered will be withdrawn and connection will be restored after payment of compensation. He contended that the petitioner has deposited the amount of compensation on the same when he received the notice from the Board, but despite that the Board has not withdrawn the FIR.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

A perusal of Annexure P-5 shows that the Haryana State Electricity Board has taken a decision that one time compensation from the consumer of different categories may be charged as per the rates mentioned (in Annexure P-5) where the theft the energy is detected and the offender comes forward voluntarily to settle and make payment of the amount of compensation. The FIR will be withdrawn and connection will be restored only after the deposit of the compensation.

Admittedly, in the instant case the petitioner deposited the aforesaid amount on the same day i.e. on 24.4. J 998 under protest to avoid further harassment. The copy of the deposit letter alongwith receipt of amount paid is attached as Annexure P-4. It is also not the case of the parties that the circular, Annexure P-5 has been withdrawn. It is still in existence and as per the circular, if the proceedings are allowed to continue, then the FIR and the consequential proceedings are misuse of process of the Court. In the similar circumstances in Shanti Kumar v. State of Haryana, 2000(4) RCR (Cri) 102 and Hem Raj Anand v. State of Haryana, 1999(1) RCR 103 this Court has quashed the FIRs.

For the reasons mentioned above, this petition is accepted and FIR No.429 dated 25.4.1998 is quashed.