1 crap3244.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3244 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 93 OF 2009 Suryabhan s/o Shivram Shinde, age 74 years, occ. Agriculture, r/o Rahimpur, Tq. Sangamner, District Ahmednagar ...Applicant (Orig.accused) VERSUS 1 The State of Maharashtra, 2 The Junior Engineer, Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd., Section Wadgaonpan, at Wadgaonpan, Tq. Sangamner, District Ahmednagar ...Respondents (No.1 Orig.complainant) ..... Shri S.K.Shinde, advocate for applicant (original accused) Shri B.V.Wagh, A.P.P. for respondent no.1 Shri S.M.Godsay, advocate for respondent no.2 ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 28 th September, 2011 2 crap3244.11 PER COURT : 1 Heard respective learned counsel for the parties. 2 This is an application preferred by the applicant (original accused), seeking permission for compounding the offence under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003. 3 The applicant herein i.e. original accused was tried for the offences punishable under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and under Section 353 of the Indian Penal Code, under Special Case No. 11 of 2006 by the Special Court, Sangamner. 4 The applicant (original accused) was convicted for the said offences by the Special Judge, Sangamner, by way of judgment and order, dated 4.2.2009 and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one month and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to suffer further simple imprisonment for 7 days for the offence punishable under Section 135 of the Electricity Act and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one month and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in 3 crap3244.11 default to suffer further simple imprisonment for 7 days for the offence punishable under Section 353 of the Indian Penal Code and it was also directed that both the said substantive sentences of imprisonment to run concurrently. 5 Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order of conviction and sentences, the applicant preferred Criminal Appeal No. 93 of 2009 before this court and questioned the said conviction and sentences. 6 The said appeal was admitted by this court on 26.2.2009 and same is pending for hearing. 7 The applicant contends that he filed an application on 13.6.2011 before respondent no.2 and it’s Regional Office at Sangamner for giving the bill of compounding charges, since the applicant desired to pay the compounding charges and to compound the offence under Section 135 of the Electricity Act. Accordingly, respondent no.2 handed over the bill for Rs. 6,606.54 ps. to the applicant inclusive of compounding charges. The applicant immediately deposited the said amount with 4 crap3244.11 respondent no.2 and annexed the copy of the bill, dated 15.7.2011, issued by respondent no.2 to that effect at Exh. ‘A’ herewith. Hence, the applicant submits that he has deposited the compounding charges, and hence, seeks permission for compounding of the offence under the Electricity Act. It is reported that fine amount has been already deposited on 4.2.2005 before the Trial Court. 8 Shri S.M.Godsay, learned counsel for respondent no. 2 stated that the bill of Rs.6,606.54 ps. was issued to the applicant as per his request inclusive of compounding charges. Accordingly, the applicant has deposited the said amount of Rs. 6,606.54 ps. inclusive of the compounding charges with respondent no.2 on 19.7.2011 and receipt thereto is annexed at Exh. ‘A’. 9 In view of the said position, Shri Godsay, learned counsel for respondent no.2 has no objection to compound the offence committed by the applicant under Section 135 of the Electricity Act. 5 crap3244.11 10 In the light of the afore said position, since the applicant herein has deposited the amount of Rs.6,606.54 ps. on 19.7.2011 as per the bill of Rs.6,606.65 ps., dated 15.7.2011 inclusive of compounding charges, and since the offence under Section 135 of the Electricity Act is compoundable in view of Section 152 of the Electricity Act on payment of compounding charges, the offence under Section 135 of the Electricity Act in the present matter, deserves to be compounded, and consequently, the applicant (original accused) is required to be acquitted therefor, by quashing and setting aside the impugned judgment and order, dated 4.2.2009 to that extent and fine amount of Rs.1,000/- deposited by the applicant is required to be refunded to him. 11 In the result, present application is allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’ thereof and the offence under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 committed by the applicant (original accused) stands compounded under Section 152 of the Electricity Act and the conviction and sentence imposed upon the applicant (original accused) in that respect, by way of judgment and order, dated 4.2.2009 stands quashed and set 6 crap3244.11 aside and the applicant (original accused) is acquitted thereof and fine amount, if any deposited by the applicant, be refunded to him, and present application stands disposed of finally. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE. dbm/crap3244.11