THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.5596 of 2008 ORDER: 1. This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash proceedings in SC.No.13 of 2008 (E) on the file of I Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for Electricity Act Cases, Ongole. 2. The petitioner herein is the sole accused and the respondent is the complainant in the Sessions Case. 3. For convenience sake, I refer the parties as arrayed before the lower Court from now on words. 4. Charge sheet dated 13-02-2008 was filed by the Inspector of Police, V & APTS, Ongole, on the file of the Court of the I Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for Electricity Act Cases, Ongole, on the ground of committing theft of electricity in milk chilling center, Yerragondapalem, Prakasham district, belonging to the petitioner/accused by the petitioner/accused. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended that by virtue of Section 151 of the Electricity Act, 2003, (for short, ‘the Act’) no Court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under the same Act, except upon a complaint in writing made by Appropriate Government or Appropriate Commission or any of their officer authorized by them or a Chief Electrical Inspector or an Electrical Inspector or licensee or the generating company, as the case may be, for that purpose. Whereas such complaint shall be filed before a Special Court under Section 153 of the Act, but the complaint was filed in this case in violation of those provisions and hence the petition is to be hereby quashed. 6. On the other hand, it is the contention of learned Public Prosecutor that there was proper compliance of law under Section 151 of the Act and there are no infirmities and hence, the petition is liable to be dismissed. 7. Therefore, it is to be examined as to whether there was proper filing of charge sheet and whether there are grounds to quash the proceedings. Section 151 of the Act reads as hereunder: “No Court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under this Act except upon a complaint in writing made by Appropriate Government or Appropriate Commission or any of their officer authorized by them or a Chief Electrical Inspector or an Electrical Inspector or licensee or the generating company, as the case may be, for this purpose.” Section 153 of the Act reads as follows: 1. The State Government may, for the purposes of providing speedy trial of offences referred to in Sections (135 to 140 and Section 150), by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute as many Special Courts as may be necessary for such area or areas, as may be specified in the notification. 2. A Special Court shall consist of a single Judge who shall be appointed by the State Government with the concurrence of the High Court. 3. A person shall not be qualified for appointment as a Judge of a Special Court unless he was, immediately before such appointment, an Additional District and Sessions Judge. 4. Where the office of the Judge of a Special Court is vacant, or such Judge is absent from the ordinary place of sitting of such Special Court, or he is incapacitated by illness or otherwise for the performance of his duties, any urgent business in the Special Court shall be disposed of- a) by a Judge, if any, exercising jurisdiction in the Special Court; b) where there is no such other Judge available, in accordance with the direction of District and Sessions Judge having jurisdiction over the ordinary place of sitting of Special Court, as notified under sub-section (1). There is no basis to say that the Inspector of Police, V & APTS, Ongole, comes within the ambit of Section 151 of the Act. There is also no basis that any authorization was given to him to file the complaint. By virtue of Section 153 of the Act, there should be a Special Court constituted as provided therein for taking cognizance of such cases. Therefore, filing of the complaint before the I Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for Electricity Act Cases, Ongole, is not proper. By virtue of Section 482 Cr.P.C., if there is any abuse of process of law and un-necessary harassment of concerned accused the same shall be prevented. In other words, filing of the complaint without proper authority would result in abuse of process of law and un-necessary harassment of the petitioner/accused. Accordingly, the proceedings are liable to be quashed. In the result, the petition is allowed quashing the proceedings in SC.No.13 of 2008 on the file of the I Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for Electricity Act Cases, Ongole, subject to the observation made above. ________________________________ G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY, J April 01, 2011 Pn THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.5596 of 2008 April 01, 2011 Pn