A ADDeilQRt HI@H COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT 8ILASPUR Cr.M.P.No-171 of 2008 Asssstant Engineer, ChhQttisgarh State Eiectridty Board, Sarangarh, Tahsii Sarcxngarh, District Kaigwh (C.^.) R®spond@nt Accused person Versus Devendra Kumar Sahu Son of Shri Banshidhar Sahu.aged about 32 years, Resident of Viilage Chantipali, Sarangarh, Tahsi! Sarangarh, district ftaigarh (C.<&.) (Applscation for grant of leave to appeal yndter sectlon 378 (4) of the Cr.P.C.) (SB: Hon'bleMr.T.P. Sharma, J.) Pre-sent: Mr. P^Tiwari, coun^l for the appellant. OR&ER (Passed on 19th JaRuary. 2010) 1. This is an applicatson for grant of leaye to appeal against the jydgment of acquittal doted 17.11.2007 passed by liie Speciai Judge (constituted under the Electricity Act, 2003), ftai9arh, in Special Case No.85/2007, whereby learned Special Judge has acquitted the respondent of the charge of Section 135 of the Eiectricit/ Act, 2003. 2. Leamed counse! for 1+ie appelbnt submits that the Court below has not considered the eyidence of compSainanfs witnes^s and has acquitt'ed the respondent only on the ground that the compiainant has not examined any independent wi+ness, 3. I have heard learned counsel for the c3ppelJant and perused th@ eyidence of JunJor Engineer Tarachand Sahu (PW-1), Jagrotram (PW-2) and Sub Engsneer ft.&eyashs (PW-3) who have deposedl that they have seert water purrtp m the field of the respondent in working conditton and withoyt any - ^^. lawful connection, pump was foundsn operating condition. They have aJso deposed that they casne to know from the persons pre^%nt in the fleld that the respondent has taken dlrect connection from electric line without any connection provsded to him- 4. The appellant has not examined any person who told these witnesses 1+iat the respondent has instalted ille9al connection. Statewents of the witnesses In the present case js hearsoy evidence andl in abs^nce of evidence of substarstiye witness of the sncident, it ss diffjcult to hold that the respondent was using etectrsc by instdling illega! connection. 5. After appreciating the eyidence available on rccord, l4ie Court below has acquitted the respondent. 6. On due conslderation, I do not find any case for gront of leave to fl^peal against the judgment of acqusttal. Consequently, ^ie ^pticotion is Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge