Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. - (1.) Heard Ms. Naina Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Suraj Verma, learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties No. 2.
(2.) In this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 1-9-2014 passed by learned A.J.C.-I, Special Court, Electricity at Ranchi to connection with Dhurwa (TP P.S. Case No. 22/2014, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 527/2014, whereby and whereunder the learned Court below has refused to give a direction to the opposite party No. 2 for compounding of the offence holding that the matter of compounding is to be determined by the Electricity Department itself.
(3.) It has been submitted by the learned counsel fot the petitioner that initially there was a demand of Rs. 3,59,355/- from the erstwhile owner of the property and infact the electricity connection was running in the name of the erstwhile owner even after the same was transferred to the petitioner. Learned counsel fot the petitioner submits that on account of Rs. 1,22,000/- was the loss amount as suffered by the Electricity Department which has also been deposited by the petitioner apart from the amount of Rs. 40,000/- as compounding cost of the offence. It has therefore been submitted by the learned counsel fot the petitioner that since the entire amount including arrears of the loss caused to the Electricity Department has been deposited along with the compounding cost the entire criminal proceedings as against the petitioner be quashed. Learned counsel fot the petitioner further submits that compounding of offence does not have any concerned with the arrears of the electricity dues.;