Reserved IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Revision No. 188 of 2007 Irshad Hussain ……..Revisionist. Versus State and Other. …..Respondents. Present: Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate for the revisionist. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Government Advocate for the State of Uttarakhand. Date of Decision : 7.9.2010 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J (Oral) 1. Heard Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate for the revisionist and Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Government Advocate for the State of Uttarakhand. 2. This criminal revision has been filed against the order dated 29.7.1999 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur in Case Crime No. 19 of 1999, who has refused to accept the final report given by the Police in Case Crime No. 19 of 1999 under Section 39/40 of the Indian Electricity Act and has rejected the report and issued non- bailable warrants against the accused i.e. the present revisionist. While doing so the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate has examined all the material witnesses and evidence against the accused persons, such as the fact that the seal in the meter in the premises of the accused has been found to be tempered plus the procedure, which is adopted by the Electricity Department while checking of such meters in order to assess the cost of pilferage, has been examined by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur. Therefore, he has rightly rejected the Final Report submitted by the Police. 3. This Court finds no ground for interference in the order 29.7.1999 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur. The instant criminal revision is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. 4. The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the Court concerned for necessary compliance. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J) 7.09.2010 Rathour 2