MUHAMMAD AZAM Versus THE STATE Ch. Zahoor Nasir , Syed Iftikhar Ali

This is a revision petition filed by Muhammad Azam, petitioner, against the judgment of a learned Additional Sessions Judge of Okara, dated 18‑10‑1987, dismissing his appeal. Earlier, the petitioner had been convicted by the Special Magistrate, WAPDA. Multan, camp at Okara, under section 39‑A of the Electricity Act and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 16‑3‑1985, Saeed Ahmad Nasir S.D.O., WAPDA, Dipalpur, P.W.1 alongwith Ahmad Khan, Meter Inspector, Muhammad Sharif Line Superintendent. Hakim Ali, Linesman and Ali Ahmad, Assistant Linesman checked the meter of Muhammad Azam, petitioner, bearing Account No. 11095/1). The meter was found to have been tampered as it bore bogus seals. It appeared that the reading of the meter had been reversed. Saeed Ahmad Nasir, S.D.O. P.W.1 took the meter into his custody and sent complaint Exh.P.B. to Police Station, Dipalpur, where formal F.I.R. Exh.P.B./1 was recorded.

3. The petitioner denied the accusations that were levelled against him. He alleged that he had been falsely involved in the case due to enmity with the WAPDA officials.

4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. I need not go into the merits of the case, as the learned counsel for the petitioner is not challenging the conviction, but only prays for a lesser sentence. In this connection it is submitted that the statements of Saeed Nasir P.W.1 and Muhammad Sharif, Lines Superintendent P.W.3 that the meter reading had been reversed, cannot be accepted on its face value as no witness from the Meter Testing Section of WAPDA had been produced to state that the reading of the meter appeared to have been put back, or any past bills of the petitioner were produced to show by comparison that the subsequent bills of the petitioners were considerably low. It is submitted that it has blindly been assumed that the meter was tampered with the object of reversing the reading therein. The arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner are attractive, but without substance. No consumer has any right to break the seals of a meter installed by WAPDA and where he does so, he becomes criminally liable, even though there be no malice or benefit derived therefrom. However, the petitioner appears to have undergone detention for some length of time. I would, therefore, reduce hip sentence to that already undergone but would impose a fine of Rupees one thousand (Rs.1,000). If the fine is not paid, the petitioner shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months.

5. In view of the above, this petition stands partly accepted, in terms of the reduction in the sentence, as stated above. Subject to the fine of Rupees one thousand (Rs.1,000) being paid by the petitioner, he shall be released forthwith, if not required in any other case.

S.A./M‑652/L Sentence reduced.