PARIMAL BHOGILAL PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order rendered in Special Electric Case No. 14/2005 by the learned Special Judge, Vadodara, dated 26.2.2010 recording the conviction of the accused for offence under Section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Old Act') as well as Section 135(1)(a) of the Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as 'the New Act') and imposing sentence of simple imprisonment for 1 year and fine of Rs. 26,68,198/-, i/d S.I. for 3 months.

(2.) The facts of the case, briefly summarised, are as follows:

(3.) It is this judgment which has been assailed, inter alia, on the ground that the conviction of the accused for the alleged offence has been recorded erroneously as the charge itself is defective and untenable and also the conviction and sentence recorded under Section 135 of the New Act would not be sustainable as the New Act was not there at the time of the incident. Further, it has also been contended that there are major contradictions in the evidence of the witnesses including the officers of GEB and the conviction has been recorded on the sole basis of the confessional statement or the statements recorded by the officers of the GEB. It is also contended that framing of the charge under Section 135 of the New Act is illegal as the offence had taken place before commencement of the New Act and the Act would not be applicable. It has also been contended that even for the conviction under Section 39 of the Old Act it is required to be proved that the accused is a consumer and as per the evidence on record, the accused is not a consumer and therefore the learned Judge has committed an error in recording conviction and has also failed to appreciate these aspects as well as the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court.