IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.8139 of 2008 VINOD KUMAR SINGH, S/O SRI LAXUMAN SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BELAUNDI, P.S. MOHANIA, DISTRICT KAIMUR (BHABUA) .. PETITIONER Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR .. OPPOSITE PARTY **** /6/ 21.05.2010 Heard the counsel for the parties. 2. This petition is directed for quashing the first information report arising out of Mohania P.S. Case No. 342 of 2007, G.R. No. 1700 of 2007 registered under Sections 379 of the Penal Code and 135, 138, 139 and 140 of the Electricity Act. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the police have no jurisdiction to lodge first information report and investigate the case. It has further been contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and has filed various documents which show that protests were filed by the petitioner against the electricity bills and regarding the burning of transformer. He has filed several Annexures in which letters of the consumers are also there. The petitioner uses to pay the bills and has falsely been implicated due to protest filed by the petitioner against the Electricity Department. 2 The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon a decision reported in 2009(3) P.L.J.R., 767 (Satyendra Rai @ Satyandar Kumar Rai @ Bajranjwali Vrs. The State of Bihar & Anr.). 4. The learned counsel for the Electricity Department, however, contended that the decision cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not applicable as the Electricity Rules 2005 confers power to the police to investigate and further that this occurrence is of 14.12.2007 and the amendment of the Electricity Rules come into force in May, 2007, itself, and published in extraordinary gazette by which Sections 151A and 151B of the Electricity Act inserted by which the police has been given power to investigate. However, from perusal of Section 151A of the Electricity Act the police have all the powers to investigate as well as the power is provided under the amended rule and, hence, the decision relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of this case. 5. The next part that he has submitted that in the first information report it has been alleged that one Asim Hussain, Assistant Electrical Engineer, Mohania, conducted a 3 raid on 14.12.2007 at 07.45 a.m. in connection with electricity theft and the raiding party found that adjacent to the house of the petitioner there is three phase L.T. line pole and inside the mill there is one atta chaki, one haller, one motor of 10 H.P. and starter. Inside the mill 60 bags of paddy was also kept there. The haller was found in operating condition, but, there is no legal connection for this purpose. There was illegal use of electricity and the Electricity Department suffered a great loss. However, the raiding party seized one starter Ref. No. SDLA/3018, one wooden board on which three cut out was fixed and about ten meter wire. Petitioner refused to sign upon the seizure list. 6. Having regard to the allegation, I do not find any merit in this application and at this stage the Court can not look into the defence of the accused where there is specific allegation that the raiding party found the illegal use of the electricity by the petitioner in the said mill of the petitioner. 7. There petition is hereby rejected. S.A. ( Gopal Prasad, J. )