CRIMINAL MISCELLANIOUS No.6614 OF 2002 In the matter of an application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 1. PRABHASH CHANDRA MANDAL, SON OF SRI HRISHI KESH MANDAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BARBADDA, P.S. KALYANPUR, DISTRICT DHANBAD, PRESENTLY POSTED AS ASSISTANT ELECTRICAL ENGINEER, ELECTRIC SUPPLY SUB-DIVISION, BEGUSARAI RURAL. 2. RAM SEWAK SINGH, SON OF LATE BENGALI SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MALPUR, P.S. PIPARIA, DISTRICT LAKHISARAI, PRESENTLY POSTED AS ELECTRICAL EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICT SUPPLY DIVISION, BEGUSARAI. 3. ARUN KUMAR AMBASTHA, SON OF LATE MAHESHWAR PRASAD, RESIDENT OF RAJENDRA NAGAR, POWER HOUSE ROAD, P.S. BEGUSARAI, DISTRICT BEGUSARAI, PRESENTLY POSTED AS STATISTIC-CUM-EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE, BEGUSARAI. 4. LALIT KUMAR SINGH, SON OF LATE JALESHWAR SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE THAKARAHA, P.S. THAKARAHA, DISTRICT WEST CHAMPARAN, PRESENTLY POSTED AS ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT ELECTRICAL ENGINEER, ELECTRIC SUPPLY SECTION, WEST, BEGUSARAI. 5. UPENDRA SINGH, SON OF SRI SHYAM DEO SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PACHAMBA, P.S. SUHIRD NAGAR, BEGUSARAI, PRESENTLY POSTED AS SKILLED KHALASI (ELECTRICAL), BEGUSARAI, RURAL SUB-DIVISION. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ PETITIONERS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. RAJENDRA PODDAR, SON OF LATE RAM GULAM PODDAR, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE LAXMIPUR, P.S. BIRPUR, DISTRICT BEGUSARAI. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTIES For the petitioners :- Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, A.P.P. P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. SHEEMA ALI KHAN S.A. Khan, J. Petitioners are working in the Electricity Department on various posts and were at the relevant time posted at Begusarai. A report was instituted on 16.8.2001 in which it is said that the petitioners raided the premises of one 2 Rajendra Poddar and found that son of Rajendra Poddar was channelising electricity illegally from the main line. The petitioners instituted a case of theft of electricity against the son of Rajendra Poddar. Rajendra Poddar instituted a complaint impleading these petitioners as accused persons in a case under Sections 406, 420 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation is that these petitioners disconnected 15 meters of P.V.C., and abused the complainant and his wife. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that filing of complaint case numbered as 1495 C of 2001 is an abuse of the process of law, inasmuch as the petitioners had earlier filed a case alleging theft of electricity against the son of the complainant. It is submitted that if such cases are permitted to be instituted and the government employees are faced with threat of a criminal case each time they perform a public duty, it would virtually be impossible for them to work fearlessly, which would give a wide handle 3 to those persons who commit theft of electricity. 3. Considering the submissions made aforesaid, this Court comes to the conclusion that infact allowing the petitioners to face a criminal trial would amount to abuse of the process of law. 4. In the result, the order dated 2.2.2002, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Begusarai in Complaint Case No. 1495 C of 2001 is quashed. This application is allowed. Patna High Court, The 24th of January, 2011, Sanjay/N.A.F.R. ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)