1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1629 OF 2010 WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 314 OF 2007 Jagdish Ganeshlal Choudhari applicant vs Maharashtra Rajya Vidhyut Mandal alias M.S.E.B. alias M.S.E.D.C.Ltd. through In-charge Deputy Executive Engineer, Flying Squad Shri Avinash Respondents Ghaasham Raut and another ------------ Shri J.R. Shaikh, Advocate, for applicant/appellant Shri S.M.Godsay, Advocate, for Respondent No. 1. Shri V.G. Shelke, A.P.P. for Respondent No.2- State. ----------- Coram : Shrihari P. Davare, J. Date : 11.03.2011. ORAL ORDER 01. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 02. Criminal Appeal No.314 of 2007 by the present applicant- appellant (original accused) has been directed against the judgment and order dated 4.8.2007, rendered by the learned Special Judge, Jalna, in Special Case No. 1 of 2005 [Electricity Act], challenging the conviction and sentence inflicted upon him under Section 135 of the Indian Electricity Act ("The said Act" for brevity), and the said appeal is pending. 2 03. By the impugned judgment and order dated 4.8.2007, the appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 135 of the said Act, and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.1,41,900/= (three times of bill amount of Rs. 47,300/-), in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one month, as well as he is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the said Act and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/=, in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month. 04. Admittedly, the applicant-appellant has deposited the said fine amount of Rs.1,41,900, as well as Rs.10,000/=, totalling Rs.1,51,900/= before the trial court, on 4.8.2007. Moreover, the substantive sentences have been suspended by this court and the appellant has been enlarged on bail. 05. On the face of aforesaid position, the appellant has preferred present criminal application No.1629 of 2010, requesting for permission to compound the offences, by accepting the compounding charges and also requesting that the applicant/appellant (original accused) be acquitted, by setting aside the impugned judgment and order dated 4.8.2007, by invoking provisions of Section 152 of the said Act. 3 06. The applicant submits that besides the fine amount of Rs. 1,51,900/- already paid by the applicant, he has also deposited an amount of Rs.30,000/= towards compounding charges, with Respondent No.1-original complainant, and produced the receipt dated 10.3.2011, thereof, which is taken on record and marked as document "X" colly. 07. The applicant further submits that the date of the raid is 20.11.2004, and almost six years have been lapsed and the applicant wants to buy peace of mind and to give finality to the matter and hence, he is ready to compound the offence, if Respondent No.1-orig. complainant consents for setting aside the conviction and sentence, by this court. 08. Shri S.M. Godsay, learned counsel for Respondent No.1-original complainant has stated that the applicant has already deposited fine amount of Rs.1,41,900/- which is three times of the bill amount Rs. 47,300 and also paid fine amount of Rs.10,000/=, totalling to Rs. 1,51,000/=. He also stated that Respondent No.1 has received the amount of Rs.47,300/= towards the bill amount, but balance amount is lying in the trial court, and the said amount be paid to the respondent No.1-complainant towards compensation. Mr. Godsay further submitted that the applicant-appellant has already deposited Rs.30,000/= towards 4 compounding charges with Resp. No.1, on 10.3.2011 and admitted receipt thereof. Mr. Godsay submitted that this is the first offence committed by the applicant and accordingly, Mr. Godsay, on instructions, stated that he has no objection to compound the aforesaid offences. 09. In the said context, learned counsel Shri J.R. Shaikh for the applicant-appellant, on instructions, submitted that if the conviction and sentence is set aside, by compounding the offence under Section 152 of the said Act, the applicant-appellant shall not claim fine amount of Rs.1,51,900/, which is already deposited in the court. The said statement is accepted and taken on record. 10. In the light of aforesaid submissions, statement made by learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and acceptance thereof, and aforesaid payments made, present application is allowed and the offence under Section 135 and 138 of the said Act, committed by the applicant- appellant (original accused), stands compounded since it is the first offence committed by the appellant and since he has deposited the entire amount of fine, as well as compounding charges, and the conviction and sentence under Section 135 and 138 of the aforesaid Act, imposed upon the appellant by the impugned judgment and order dated 4.8.2007 by the learned Special Judge, Jalna, in Special Case No. 1/2005 [Electricity Act] stands quashed and set aside and the appellant-original accused 5 stands acquitted therefrom. However, since the learned counsel Shri J.R. Shaikh for the appellant has made the statement, on instructions, that the fine amount already deposited in the trial court shall not be claimed by the appellant and he waived the same, it is directed the balance amount of fine lying in the trial court shall be paid to Respondent No.1 towards compensation. 11. In view of the aforesaid position, nothing survives in Criminal Appeal No.314 of 2007 and, therefore, same stands disposed of, accordingly. pnd/criap1629.10 (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. )