Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:141623 Court No. - 77 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 24332 of 2025 Applicant :- Anuj Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Lavkush Dixit Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manu Ghildyal Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit preferred today by learned counsel for applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Lavkush Dixit, learned counsel for applicant and Sri Manu Ghildyal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Electricity Department as well as learned AGA for the State-respondent. 3. The present application has been preferred for seeking quashing of chargesheet dated 23.11.2018 and cognizance order dated 11.04.2019 along with entire proceedings of Special Case No.173 of 2019 (State Vs. Anuj Yadav), arising out of Case Crime No.847 of 2018, under Section 135 of Electricity Act, P.S. Friends Colony, District Etawah, pending in the court of learned Additional District Judge/Special Judge, Electricity Act, Etawah. 4. The instant application has been preferred for challenging the entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No.847 of 2018 which has been instituted at the behest of competent authority of Electricity Department, wherein inquiry was conducted and thereafter chargesheet has been preferred whereupon cognizance of offence has been taken by learned court concerned vide order dated 11.04.2019 and thereafter non-bailable warrants has also been issued against applicant vide order dated 29.03.2025 which arisen cause of action in favour of applicant to prefer the instant application. 5. Learned counsel for applicant submitted that the establishment/house which has been alleged to be raided by Electricity Department, is having proper valid electricity connection in the name of Hoshiyar Singh who is operating fabricating activities in the same premises under the name and style of M/s. Anupam Iron Industries, documents of the same preferred through supplementary affidavit. Learned counsel for applicant has further submitted that the Electricity Department was well conversant with the fact that applicant is having no connection in respect of M/s. Anupam Iron Industries except that he is son of Hoshiyar Singh, at the same time, learned counsel for applicant also apprised the Court that there are so many other persons who are residing in the same premise such as his elder brother, namely, Anupam Kumar Yadav, but it is the applicant who has been chosen for prosecution without any strict foundation of facts which contrary to the records available and same has been admitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of Electricity Department specifically in respect of providing connection in favour of Hoshiyar Singh. 6. During course of the arguments, a precise query has been made to learned counsel appearing on behalf of Electricity Department that which provision says to implicate an alien person in respect of Section 135 of Electricity Act if raid proceeded and found that illegal connection or supply or usage of the electricity has been carried out under the same premises which has already allocated proper connection and there is availability of meter provided by Electricity Department also, it has been submitted by learned counsel for Electricity Department that proper assessment under Section 126 of Electricity Act has already been proceeded against the consumer but the same is still pending to be realized from the particular person. 7. The answer in response of implication of applicant, is found unsatisfactory since there is hardly any provision available under the said Act but as per the argument raised by learned counsel for Electricity Department, it is the applicant who was found available at the premises at the time of raid and as such, he has been implicated in the present case. 8. After considering the rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that mere presence of a person at the premises where a valid electricity connection already exists, cannot, by itself, constitute a ground for fastening criminal liability upon such person. Insofar as the provisions of the Act are concerned, the definition of 'consumer' does not contemplate bringing within its ambit an unrelated individual who neither holds any electricity connection in his name nor bears any liability assessed by the Electricity Department. 9. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, this Court finds that the entire proceedings initiated against the applicant are legally unsustainable, as the same have been instituted without any enabling provision under the Electricity Act, 2003 and as such, chargesheet dated 23.11.2018 and cognizance order dated 11.04.2019 along with entire proceedings of Special Case No.173 of 2019 (State Vs. Anuj Yadav), arising out of Case Crime No.847 of 2018, under Section 135 of Electricity Act, P.S. Friends Colony, District Etawah, pending in the court of learned Additional District Judge/Special Judge, Electricity Act, Etawah, are hereby quashed. 10. Accordingly, the instant application is allowed. Order Date :- 19.8.2025 Vivek Kr. Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad