Unauthorized reconnection of electricity after disconnection for dues warrants conviction under Section 138 of the Electricity Act.

The appellant held an electricity connection in Village Lain Baghra, Rewa, and accumulated arrears amounting to Rs. 60,809/-

Following a demand notice dated 25.01.2007, the supply was disconnected on 25.02.2007 due to non-payment

An inspection on 08.03.2007 by Electricity Board officials revealed that the appellant had unauthorizedly reconnected the supply

A complaint was filed on 16.03.2007. On 02.02.2013, the Special Sessions Judge, Electricity Act, Rewa, convicted the appellant under Section 138(kha) of the Electricity Act, sentencing him to one year of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000/-

The appellant challenged this conviction on grounds of unreliable witness testimony and documentation errors

1. Whether the trial court’s conviction of the appellant under Section 138(kha) of the Electricity Act was based on a proper appreciation of oral and documentary evidence

2. Whether the substantive sentence of imprisonment should be modified or set aside if the appellant clears the outstanding civil liability

Section 138(b) [referred to as 138(kha)] of the Electricity Act, 2003, which penalizes the unauthorized reconnection of electricity supply that has been disconnected by the licensee

The court also exercised its appellate jurisdiction under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to review the findings of the trial court

considered the principle of balancing criminal liability with the recovery of civil dues in electricity matters

During the appellate proceedings, the appellant effectively abandoned his challenge to the conviction, requesting only an opportunity to settle the outstanding bill amount

The Court found no illegality or perversity in the trial court's judgment, noting that the prosecution had proved the unauthorized reconnection through the reliable testimony of witnesses (PW-1, PW-2, and PW-3) and supporting ocular and documentary evidence

The Court observed that the core of the prosecution's case regarding the illegal use of electricity remained intact despite allegations of minor contradictions in the documents (Ex-P-1 and Ex-P-2)

In light of the appellant's willingness to pay the civil liability and the prior deposit of the fine, the Court determined that the interests of justice would be served by substituting the custodial sentence with a conditional recovery of the dues

The court granted the appellant six months to deposit the said amount; failure to do so will result in the reinstatement of the original custodial sentence imposed by the trial court. The appeal was disposed of accordingly