Crl.Misc.No.M-4594 of 2009 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc.No.M-4594 of 2009. (O&M) Decided on: February 23, 2010. Babita Kaushik .. Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and another .. Respondents * * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI * * * PRESENT Mr.Maninder Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Kshitij Sharma, AAG, Haryana. Mr.Parveen Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No.2. M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing of FIR No.20 dated 09.01.2009, under Section 379 IPC, and 135 of Indian Electricity Act, 2003, registered at Police Station, Fridabad Central. The said FIR was registered when a team consisting of respondent No.2 and three others, checked the premises of petitioner and found that seals of the electric motor were tampered with and were refixed by using adhesive and finding it to be a case of theft, the FIR was registered on the basis of checking . . . 1 Crl.Misc.No.M-4594 of 2009 (O&M) report dated 25.12.2008. It is an admitted fact that on 29.12.2008, a compounding fee of Rs.36,000/- was paid by the petitioner. Whether in case of theft of electricity, the provisions of Section 379 IPC for punishment, criminal prosecution could be launched, has been adjudicated upon by a number of judgments of this Court following the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Avtar Singh Vs.State of Punjab, AIR1965 SC 666. It has been held in number of cases that in view of provisions of Section 151 of the Electricity Act, cognizance of offence under Sections 135 & 138 of the Act, cannot be taken by any Court except on a complaint in writing made by the appropriate or proper Commission or Chief Electrical Inspector and that registration of FIR is not permissible as per Section 151 of the Electricity Act, 2003. In following cases the FIR under Section 379 IPC, pertaining to theft of electricity stand quashed being an abuse of process of the Court: - 1) Shri Rajinder Pal Vs. State of Haryana and others, 2008 (3) RCR (Crl.), Page-741; 2) Pawan Kumar and others Vs. The State of Haryana, 2003 (1) RCR (Crl.), Page-104; 3) Rajnish Kumar and others Vs. State of Haryana, 2004 (1) RCR (Crl.), Page-739; and 4) Raman Kapila and another Vs. State of Punjab. . . . 2 Crl.Misc.No.M-4594 of 2009 (O&M) Crl.Misc.No.18718 of 2008 decided on 09.03.2009. Following the ratio of above said judgments, I am of the considered opinion that the lodging of FIR in the present case at the instance of respondent No.2 and continuation of criminal proceedings under Section 379 IPC, is an abuse of process of the Court, especially when the compounding fee has already been paid by the petitioner to the Electricity Department. FIR No.20 dated 09.01.2009, under Section 379 IPC, and 135 of Indian Electricity Act, 2003, registered at Police Station, Fridabad Central and all the criminal proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed. This order, however, will not, in any manner, prejudice the rights of the electricity Department to proceed in accordance with law to recover any amount due from the petitioner as per the procedure prescribed. Disposed of . (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE February 23, 2010. rka . . . 3