RSA-948-2019 (O&M [275] Sukhdev Si Sub Divisi Power Corp Coram : Present: PANKAJ J [1] decree pass ground that of the Elec was lodged [2] ‘Sub Divis 1952-2024 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF AT CHANDIGA RSA-948 Date of De dev Singh versus Divisional Officer, Punjab State er Corporation Limited (Powercom) HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PA Mr. Puneet Kumar Bansal, Ad for the appellant. Mr. Baljinder Singh, Advocate for the respondent. **** KAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) The plaintiff is in appeal ag e passed by the Courts below whereby nd that the jurisdiction of the Civil Co e Electricity Act, 2003. Admittedly, i lodged or complaint was made by the r The issue has been elaborate Divisional Officer and another ve 024, decided vide Order dated 27.10 “21. In view of the discussion h the Act of 2003, it is held as under: (i) Once theft of electri they are empowe electricity. Under Court shall have jur seeking injunction T OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA DIGARH 948-2019 (O&M) of Decision : 29.04.2026 …Appellant ….Respondent PANKAJ JAIN Advocate vocate eal aggrieved of the judgment and hereby he has been non-suited on the vil Court is barred under Section 145 edly, it is not a case wherein any FIR y the respondent. borately dealt with by this Court in versus Smt. Kamla Devi’, RSA 27.10.2025, observing as under:- ion held hereinabove and the scheme of der: lectricity is discovered by the authorities, owered to disconnect the supply of der Section 145 of 2003 Act, no Civil e jurisdiction to entertain an application ion on such act by an officer/authority 1 t and n the n 145 y FIR urt in SA- e of ties, of ivil tion rity RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.05.01 16:27 I agree to specified portions of this document RSA-948-2019 (O&M (O&M) empowered under 2 (ii) Within 24 hours officer is obligate relating to commis station having jurisd (iii) In case, the consu electricity charges, 48 hours of such noticed herein that deposit, is without the complaint in wri (iv) The Court can ta Section 135 of the made by competent police officer filed u (v) Offences prescribe Section 150, are cog (vi) Once the police punishable under S the first time offe offence, as prescrib is made, a person offence, has to be s instituted or contin Court. (vii) Acceptance of such within the meaning (viii) States may notify i to try offences punis Section 150 with th terms of Section 1 under the 2003 Ac referred to in Sect Determination of c dependant upon cr Court has no disconnection of su of the Act or jurisdi (ix) Any offence punish er 2003 Act to disconnect the electricity. urs of such disconnection, competent gated to lodge complaint, in writing, mission of theft of electricity in police urisdiction. onsumer pays the assessed amount of ges, the electricity will be restored within uch deposit. However, it needs to be that such assessment and corresponding out prejudice to the obligation to lodge n writing. n take cognizance of an offence under the Act upon a complaint, in writing, tent officer/authority or upon report of a led under Section 173 of Cr.P.C. ribed under Sections 135 to 140 or e cognizable and non-bailable offences. ice takes cognizance of the offence er Sections 135 to 140 and Section 150, offender can claim compounding of cribed under Section 152. If the payment rson in custody in connection with the be set at liberty and no proceedings be ontinued against him in any criminal such payment, shall amount to acquittal ing of Section 300 of Cr.P.C., 1973. tify in the official gazette Special Courts unishable under Sections 135 to 140 and th the object of providing speedy trial. In on 153 Constitution of Special Courts 3 Act, is for purpose of trying offence Sections 135 to 140 and Section 150. of civil liability being incidental and n criminal liability of offender, Special o power to grant injunction on f supply of electricity under Section 135 risdiction to enterain such plea. nishable under Sections 135 to 140 and 2 ity. tent ing, lice t of thin be ding dge der ting, of a or nce 150, of ent the s be inal ittal urts and l. In urts nce 150. and cial on 135 and RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.05.01 16:27 I agree to specified portions of this document RSA-948-2019 (O&M (O&M) Section 150, is triab jurisdiction over th committed. (x) The offence has to summary trial in prescribed under Co (xi) The Special Court against the consume theft of energy. Th amount equivalent applicable for a pe date of detection of determined, whiche (xii) The amount of the c enforced like a Civi (xiii) The civil liability de to be adjusted/set o the consumer subseq 22. In view of above, this Court relied upon powers conferred b jurisdiction of Civil Court, is barr ratio can be relied upon by the compliance has been made to the means that only when a complain officer/authority regarding theft o taken cognizance of the offence pu filing of police report as per Secti can be said to be barred invoking S 23. In the absence of there be Special Court or FIR registere allegations of theft of energy, canno those cases, where there is no FIR and/or complaint filed by the com Courts, the consumer is well with Court alleging violation of the law Reliance can be placed upon rati Bench of Supreme Court in the cas and anr, 1969 AIR (Supreme Cou riable only by the Special Court having er the area where the offence has been as to be tried by Special Court as a in accordance with the procedure er Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. ourt has to determine the Civil liability sumer or a person in terms of money qua . The same shall not be less than an lent to two times of the tariff rate, a period of twelve months preceding the n of theft or the exact period of theft, if ichever is less. the civil liability, so determined, is to be Civil Court decree. ty determined by the Special Court needs set off against the amount deposited by ubsequent to registration of case. ourt finds that the Division Bench having ed by Section 154 to hold that the barred in the case of theft of energy, the the supplier only in the cases wherein o the provisions of Section 135. Which laint has been lodged by the competent ft of energy and the Special Court has e pursuant to filing of such complaint or Section 151 of 2003 Act, the jurisdiction ng Section 154 of the Act of 2003. re being any complaint filed before the stered by the police authorities, the annot assume the status of offence. In all FIR registered by the police authorities competent authorities before the Special within his right to approach the Civil e law and procedure prescribed therein. ratio of law laid down by Five Judges case of Dhulabhai etc. vs. State of M.P. Court) 78 wherein the Supreme Court 3 ving een s a ure ility qua an ate, the ft, if o be eeds by ving the the rein hich tent has t or tion the the all ities cial ivil ein. ges .P. ourt RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.05.01 16:27 I agree to specified portions of this document RSA-948-2019 (O&M (O&M) observed as under: “32. xxxxx. The result of expressed in this Court may (1) Where the sta the special tribunal be held to be exclud what the civil courts provision, however, the provisions of t complied with or the conformity with the procedure. (2) Where there of the court, an e particular Act to fin the remedies provi decisive to sustain th Where there is no e the remedies and the out the intendment b the inquiry may be necessary to see if th liability and provide or liability and furth the said right and tribunals so constitu associated with actio the said statute or no (3) Challenge to as ultra vires can constituted under th go into that question decision of the Tribu (4) When a p unconstitutional or t is to be challenged, may include a direct within the time pres t of this inquiry into the diverse views may be stated as follows :- he statute gives a finality to the orders of unals the civil court's jurisdiction must cluded if there is adequate remedy to do ourts would normally do in a suit. Such ver, does not exclude those cases where of the particular Act have not been r the statutory tribunal has not acted in the fundamental principles of judicial here is an express bar of the jurisdiction an examination of the scheme of the o find the adequacy or the sufficiency of provided may be relevant but is not n the jurisdiction of the civil court. no express exclusion the examination of d the scheme of the particular Act to find ent becomes necessary and the result of y be decisive. In the latter case it is if the statute creates a special right or a ovides for the determination of the right further lays down that all questions about nd liability shall be determined by the stituted, and whether remedies normally actions in civil courts are prescribed by or not. e to the provisions of the particular Act cannot be brought before Tribunals r that Act. Even the High Court cannot stion on a revision or reference from the ribunals. provision is already declared or the constitutionality of any provision ged, a suit is open. A writ of certiorari irection for refund if the claim is clearly prescribed by the Limitation Act but it is 4 iews s of ust o do uch here een d in icial tion the y of not n of find lt of it is or a ight bout the ally d by Act nals nnot the red sion rari arly it is RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.05.01 16:27 I agree to specified portions of this document RSA-948-2019 (O&M [3] complaint suiting the Accordingl are set asi decided afr (O&M) not a compulsory rem (5) Where the pa for refund of tax c limits or illegally col (6) Questions of apart from its consti authorities and a civ authorities are decla prohibition in the scheme of the particu is a relevant enquiry (7) An exclusion is not readily to be set down apply.” 24. It also needs to be noticed contemplated under 3rd proviso a relatable to assessment provided The same rather refers to the a prescribed by State Commissions i Section 50 of the 2003 Act pursu Difficulties) Order, 2005, dated 08. 25. Applying the aforesaid pa Court finds that it is case where the offence punishable under Section before the Special Court notified u Civil Court, cannot be held to be b Act.” Since it is a case where ther laint filed before Special Court, the g the plaintiff invoking Sections 1 rdingly, the judgments and decrees pa t aside. The matter is remanded b ed afresh on merits in accordance wit y remedy to replace a suit. e particular Act contains no machinery ax collected in excess of constitutional y collected a suit lies. s of the correctness of the assessment onstitutionality are for the decision of the a civil suit does not lie if the orders of the eclared to be final or there is an express the particular Act. In either case the rticular Act must be examined because it uiry. sion of the jurisdiction of the civil court be inferred unless the conditions above ced herein that the ‘assessed amount’ as iso appended to Section 135(1A) is not ded under Section 126 of the 2003 Act. he amount assessed as per procedure ons in the Electricity Supply Code under pursuant to the Electricity (Removal of d 08.06.2005. parameters to the present case, this e there is neither any FIR registered qua tion 135 nor any complaint preferred ied under Section 153, the jurisdiction of be barred invoking Section 154 of 2003 re there is neither any FIR nor any , the Courts below erred in non ions 145 & 154 of the 2003 Act. rees passed by both the Courts below nded back to the Trial Court to be ce with law. 5 nery onal ent f the f the ress the se it ourt ove ’ as not Act. ure der l of this qua rred n of 003 r any non- Act. below to be RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.05.01 16:27 I agree to specified portions of this document RSA-948-2019 (O&M [4] Court is sa the same ex [5] Court shall [6] [7] disposed of 29.04.2026 ‘R. Sharma' (O&M) Keeping in view that the suit sanguine that the Trial Court shal ame expeditiously. Till the decision of the suit, th t shall remain in operation. The appeal stands disposed of All pending miscellaneous a ed off. .2026 Whether speaking/ reasoned Whether reportable he suit relates to the year 2015, this rt shall make an endeavour to decide suit, the interim order passed by this sed off. eous application(s), if any, stands (PANKAJ JAIN) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No 6 , this ecide y this tands RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.05.01 16:27 I agree to specified portions of this document