Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Harbajan Singh Vs. State

Harbajan Singh vs State

Disposition Petition allowed Court Delhi Decided Aug 05, 1999
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/703719

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Crl. Misc. (Main) Petition No. 2157/1998
Subject
Electricity
Disposition
Petition allowed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Electricity Act, 1910 - Section 39/44 and Section 379 Indian Penal Code--No theft--No offence--FIR quashed. -

Key legal issue
Electricity
Outcome / disposition
Petition allowed
Acts & sections
Electricity Act, 1910 - Sections 39 and 44; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 379

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Harbajan Singh

Advocate R.P. Kathuria and; Kailash Gulani, Advs

Respondent

State

Advocate M.S. Butalia, Adv.

Legal References

Acts
Electricity Act, 1910 - Sections 39 and 44; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 379
Reported In
1999(50)DRJ821

Excerpt

electricity act, 1910 - section 39/44 and section 379 indian penal code--no theft--no offence--fir quashed. - m.s.a. siddiqui, j.1. by this petition under section 482 cr.p.c., the petitioner seeks quashing of the fir no. 12/97 registered under sections 39/44 of the indian electricity act read with section 379 of the indian penal code at the police station najafgarh, delhi. on perusal of fir in question, it appears that the petitioner's premises were inspected by the enforcement staff of desu on 3.1.1997, when it was discovered that the electricity was being abstracted fraudulently by tampering the meter. in ramesh chandra vs . state of delhi : 68(1997)dlt257 it was held that the mere existence of the tampered meter is not enough to attract the provisions of section 39 of the act and there is no presumption of dishonest abstraction, consumption or use of electric energy on discovery of tampered meters. the presumption under section 39 will arise if artificial means were employed to abstract, consumer or use energy. in my opinion, the case is fully covered by the decision in the case of ramesh chander v. state of delhi (supra). consequently, i am of the opinion, that no prima facie case has been made out against the petitioner under sections 39/44 of the indian electricity act and 379 of the indian penal code. accordingly, the petition is allowed and the fir no. 12/97 registered under section 39/44 of the indian electricity act read with 379 of the indian penal code at the police station najafgarh, delhi, is quashed.

Full Judgment

M.S.A. Siddiqui, J.

1. By this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks quashing of the FIR No. 12/97 registered under Sections 39/44 of the Indian Electricity Act read with Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code at the Police Station Najafgarh, Delhi. On perusal of FIR in question, it appears that the petitioner's premises were inspected by the enforcement staff of DESU on 3.1.1997, when it was discovered that the electricity was being abstracted fraudulently by tampering the meter. In Ramesh Chandra Vs . State of Delhi : 68(1997)DLT257 it was held that the mere existence of the tampered meter is not enough to attract the provisions of Section 39 of the Act and there is no presumption of dishonest abstraction, consumption or use of electric energy on discovery of tampered meters. The presumption under Section 39 will arise if artificial means were employed to abstract, consumer or use energy. In my opinion, the case is fully covered by the decision in the case of Ramesh Chander v. State of Delhi (Supra). Consequently, I am of the opinion, that no prima facie case has been made out against the petitioner under Sections 39/44 of the Indian Electricity Act and 379 of the Indian Penal Code. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the FIR No. 12/97 registered under Section 39/44 of the Indian Electricity Act read with 379 of the Indian Penal Code at the Police Station Najafgarh, Delhi, is quashed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial