Israil v. State Of Haryana

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ......

Criminal Misc. No.M-28261 of 2016 .....

Date of decision:17.8.2016 Israil

...Petitioner

v.

State of Haryana

...Respondent

....

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh .....

Present:

Mr. Mohammad Arshad, Advocate for the petitioner. .....

Inderjit Singh, J.

The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.986 dated 11.12.2015 registered for the offence under Section 135 of Electricity Act, 2003 at Police Station I&P Gurugram, District Gurugram. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record.

As per the prosecution version, the premises of the petitioner were checked and theft of electricity was found and total loss of `23,183/- (assessment charge `18,183/- and compounding charge `5,000/-) occurred to the Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam (hereinafter referred to as `the Nigam') and notice was sent to the consumer, but he did not pay the theft penalty. Even today when the learned counsel for the petitioner was asked as to whether the petitioner is ready to deposit the amount of this penalty, Harpal Singh Parmar 2016.08.19 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Cr. Misc. No.M-28261 of 2016 [2] the counsel argued that this is a false case and the petitioenr is already paying the bills.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and in view of the allegations regarding theft of electricity etc., I do not find it a fit case where the present petitioner is entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail.

Therefore, finding no merit in this petition, the same is dismissed.

August 17, 2016.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No Harpal Singh Parmar 2016.08.19 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh