1 apl1382.26.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.1382 OF 2026 Abdul Hakim Abdul Matin Kadechur Age about 57 years, Occ: Service. R/o Plot No.83-84-85, North Survase MIRT Nagar, Near Quba Masjid, Solapur. ...APPLICANT ...V E R S U S… 1. The State of Maharashtra, through PSO Kelwad, Dist. Nagpur. 2. Pyarelal Madhvprasad Agrawal Aged about 75 years, R/o Plot No.304, Kamal Palace, Ramdaspeth, Nagpur. ...NON-APPLICANTS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Aditya Pande, Advocate for applicant. Shri A.G. Mate, APP for non-applicant no.1/State. None for non-applicant no.2. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM:- M.W. CHANDWANI, J. DATE :- 08.10.2026 ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned APP for non-applicant no.1/State. Notice issued to non- applicant no.2 is received back with report that non-applicant no.2 is reported to be dead. 2. Admit. 2026:BHC-NAG:13801 2 apl1382.26.odt 3. The applicant seeks quashing of the First Information Report bearing Crime No.30/2014 dated 12.04.2014 registered with Police Station, Kelwad, District Nagpur for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 427, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 (for short, “IPC”) and Charge-sheet filed in RCC No.364/2014 before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kalmeshwar, Nagpur. 4. The charge-sheet depicts that the applicant was working as Deputy General Manager with Maharashtra Eastern Grid Power Company Limited (for short, “the Grid Company”). On 09.04.2014, when non-applicant no.2/complainant went to his field, he found that an electric line pole was being installed in his land without obtaining any notice or permission from him. When the complainant asked the labourers who were working there as to why the said electric pole is being installed, the labourers responded that the said pole is being installed under the instructions of the applicant and other co-accused. When the complainant tried to stop the work, the co-accused threatened him. It is alleged in the FIR that due to erection of the said pole, the complainant was put to a loss of 10 lakhs. Therefore, on the ₹ 3 apl1382.26.odt complaint of the complainant, the aforesaid offence came to be registered against the applicant and other co-accused. 5. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the Grid Company is a licencee of Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (for short, “the MERC”) and was authorized to lay-down the electric line. The applicant was working as Deputy General Manger. The Grid Company was laying down the transmission lines from Tiroda – Akola – Aurangabad and for that purpose, electric towers were to be erected. One of such electric towers was being installed in the field of the complainant. At the relevant time, the applicant was working as In-charge Site Engineer. It is contended that by virtue of the licence issued by the MERC, the Grid Company is entitled to carry out the work as per Section 164 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (for short, “the Electricity Act”) and Section 10 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (for short, “Telegraph Act”). Therefore, they have the power to place electric lines under, over, along, or across, and posts in or upon, any immovable property. 6. The sum and substance of the argument of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the licencee has power to enter into any immovable property for the purpose of laying down 4 apl1382.26.odt electric lines. Therefore, according to him, the offence under Section 447 of the IPC is not made out at all. It is also contended that the damages calculated by the learned District Magistrate have already been paid to non-applicant no.2. Therefore, the offence of mischief punishable under Section 427 is also not made out. He further went on to submit that the applicant was not present at the time when the alleged threats were given and therefore, Section 506 will also not be applicable vis-a-vis the applicant. 7. Per contra, learned APP objected to the application on the ground that without issuing notice, the accused persons entered into the land of non-applicant no.2. Therefore, he sought rejection of the application. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned APP and having gone through the charge-sheet and the material placed on record by the applicant, it transpires that the State of Maharashtra vide communication dated 20.12.2010, has accorded approval to lay down the electric line from Tiroda – Akola – Aurangabad. The licence issued by the MERC to the Grid Company is also placed on record. Both these documents are a part of official record of the State of Maharashtra 5 apl1382.26.odt as well as the MERC. Perusal of these documents goes to show that the Grid Company is a licencee of the MERC under Section 14 of the Electricity Act. The Grid Company was authorized to lay down the electric line from Tiroda – Akola – Aurangabad and the applicant is an employee of the Grid Company. Thus, the applicant was authorized to lay down the electric line under the licence of the MERC. 9. This takes me to Section 68 of the Electricity Act, which directly deals with overhead lines, which reads thus: “Section 68. Overhead lines: -- (1) An overhead line shall, with prior approval of the Appropriate Government, be installed or kept installed above ground in accordance with the provisions of sub- section (2). (2) The provisions contained in sub-section (1) shall not apply- (a) in relation to an electric line which has a nominal voltage not exceeding 11 kilovolts and is used or intended to be used for supplying to a single consumer; (b) in relation to so much of an electric line as is or will be within premises in the occupation or control of the person responsible for its installation; or (c) in such other cases, as may be prescribed. (3) The Appropriate Government shall, while granting approval under subsection (1), impose such conditions (including conditions as to the ownership and operation of the line) as appear to it to be necessary. 6 apl1382.26.odt (4) The Appropriate Government may vary or revoke the approval at any time after the end of such period as may be stipulated in the approval granted by it. (5) Where any tree standing or lying near an overhead line or where any structure or other object which has been placed or has fallen near an overhead line subsequent to the placing of such line, interrupts or interferes with, or is likely to interrupt or interfere with, the conveyance or transmission of electricity or the accessibility of any works, an Executive Magistrate or authority specified by the Appropriate Government may, on the application of the licensee, cause the tree, structure or object to be removed or otherwise dealt with as he or it thinks fit. (6) When disposing of an application under sub-section (5), an Executive Magistrate or authority specified under that sub-section shall, in the case of any tree in existence before the placing of the overhead line, award to the person interested in the tree such compensation as he thinks reasonable, and such person may recover the same from the licensee. Explanation. - For the purposes of this section, the expression “tree” shall be deemed to include any shrub, hedge, jungle growth or other plant.” 10. Thus, as per Section 68, overhead lines can be installed or kept installed above the ground in accordance with the prior approval of the appropriate Government. In the present case, the Grid Company was duly granted licence by the MERC and the State Government authorized the Grid Company to lay overhead lines from Tiroda – Akola – Aurangabad, which is 7 apl1382.26.odt palpable from the sterling documents which are produced on record by the applicant. 11. This takes me to Section 164 of the Electricity Act, which reads as under: “Section 164. (Exercise of powers of Telegraph Authority in certain cases): The Appropriate Government may, by order in writing, for the placing of electric lines or electrical plant for the transmission of electricity or for the purpose of telephonic or telegraphic communications necessary for the proper co-ordination of works, confer upon any public officer, licensee or any other person engaged in the business of supplying electricity under this Act, subject to such conditions and restrictions, if any, as the Appropriate Government may think fit to impose and to the provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, any of the powers which the telegraph authority possesses under that Act with respect to the placing of telegraph lines and posts for the purposes of a telegraph established or maintained, by the Government or to be so established or maintained.” Thus, from the above said Section, it is clear that the Appropriate Government has conferred the powers to the Grid Company. Government Notification dated 14.06.2011 which is placed on record depicts that the Grid Company has been conferred powers of the Telegraph Authority to exercise the powers under Section 164 of the Electricity Act and Section 10 of the Telegraph Act. 8 apl1382.26.odt 12. At this juncture, it will be apt to mention here that the power under Section 10 of the Telegraph Act stands vested in and enjoyed by the Grid Company in wake of the Notification dated 14.06.2011. Section 10 reads thus: “10. Power for telegraph authority to place and maintain telegraph lines and posts.—The telegraph authority may, from time to time, place and maintain a telegraph line under, over, along or across, and posts in or upon, any immovable property: Provided that— (a) the telegraph authority shall not exercise the powers conferred by this section except for the purposes of a telegraph established or maintained by the Central Government, or to be so established or maintained; (b) the Central Government shall not acquire any right other than that of user only in the property under, over, along, across, in or upon which the telegraph authority places any telegraph line or post; and (c) except as hereinafter provided, the telegraph authority shall not exercise those powers in respect of any property vested in or under the control or management of any local authority, without the permission of that authority; and (d) in the exercise of the powers conferred by this section, the telegraph authority shall do as little damage as possible, and when it has exercised those powers in respect of any property other than that referred to in clause (c), shall pay full compensation to all persons interested for any damage sustained by them by reason of the exercise of those powers.” 9 apl1382.26.odt 13. Thus, Section 10 of the Telegraph Act empowers the Telegraph Authority to place and maintain telegraph lines under, over, along or across and posts in or upon any immovable property. Section 10(b) of the Telegraph Act makes it abundantly clear that while acquiring the power to lay down telegraph lines, the Central Government does not acquire any right in the property other than that of a user. Further, Section 10(d) of the Telegraph Act obliges the Telegraph Authority to ensure that it causes as little damage as possible and that the Telegraph Authority shall also be obliged to pay full compensation to all persons interested for any damage sustained by them by reason of the exercise of those powers. Thus, in wake of the Notification dated 14.06.2011 under Section 164 of the Electricity Act, the power of Section 10 of the Telegraph Act was conferred upon the Grid Company and employees of the Grid company were authorized to enter upon any immovable property. The record also shows that the District Magistrate/the Collector has also passed an order for damages for erecting a tower pole in the field of non-applicant no.2. Therefore, I find support in the argument of the learned counsel for the applicant that the offence under Section 448 of the IPC has not been made out as the Grid Company was authorized to enter into the field of non-applicant no.2. Since, the damages have already been awarded to non- 10 apl1382.26.odt applicant no.2 therefore, Section 427 which prescribes punishment for intentionally damaging or diminishing the property of the public or any other person does not apply in the present case. Lastly, the allegation of threat is not attributed to the present applicant. Therefore, no case is made out against the applicant either under Sections 448, 427 or 506 of the IPC as the case in hand is lacking the basic ingredients of those offences. 14. A reference can be made to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others Vs. Bhajanlal and others 1, which reads thus: “102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we have given the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised. 1 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 11 apl1382.26.odt (1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a 12 apl1382.26.odt specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” 15. In view of the above, the present case is squarely covered by Clauses (1) and (3) of Para 102 the decision of Bhajanlal (supra). 16. Considering the facts mentioned above, a case is made out for exercising the inherent powers of this Court for quashing of the FIR and consequent proceedings. Hence, the following order is passed: (i) The application is allowed. (ii) First Information Report bearing Crime No.30/2014 dated 12.04.2014 registered with Police Station, Kelwad, District Nagpur for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 427, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 and Charge- sheet filed in RCC No.364/2014 before Judicial 13 apl1382.26.odt Magistrate First Class, Kalmeshwar, Nagpur are hereby quashed and set aside, qua the present applicant. (iii) The application stands disposed of. (M.W. CHANDWANI J.) Wagh Signed by: Mr. S.R. Wagh Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 14/10/2026 16:51:51