M. SHARIF CHEEMA Versus S.D.O., WAPDA

A case under section 188, P.P.C. and section 39-A of the Electricity Act, 1910 was registered with Police Station City Daska, on the statement of Saeed Akhtar Ansari, Resident Magistrate, Daska on 26-4-1988 vide F.I.R. No. 98/88. According to the F.I.R., the allegations were that the petitioners unauthorizedly consuming the electricity of the WAPDA. On receipt of information, a raid was conducted and in consequence thereof, the Meter installed in the premises of the petitioners was taken into custody alongwith wire and locks on 26-4-1988. It is forcefully contended by the learned counsel that there was not a shred of evidence to connect the petitioners with the commission of the crime inasmuch as the aforesaid case was registered against them with mala fide and ulterior motives on the part of the raiding party. He maintains that earlier the petitioners instituted a suit before the Civil Court, Daska for obtaining relief against the local employees of WAPDA. It is submitted that on non-compliance of the order of the Civil Court, contempt proceedings were also initiated by the petitioners against the WAPDA employees. In that way, the WAPDA employees were much annoyed with the petitioners. According to the learned counsel, in order to take revenge, the petitioners were implicated in the aforesaid false case. This Constitution petition was admitted to regular hearing by this Court on 6-3-1989 and the proceedings before the criminal Court were also stayed subject to notice. The argument of the learned counsel is that no offence as alleged was made out from the plain reading of the F.I.R. (Annexure F/A"). Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent WAPDA opposes this petition and maintains that sufficient evidence shall be produced before the learned trial Court to bring the guilt home to the accused. The learned Additional Advocate-General is, however, of the view that the allegations as mentioned in the F.I.R. do not constitute the commission of any offence.

2. The admitted position which emerges from the facts and circumstances of this case is that a civil suit was instituted by the present petitioners against WAPDA employees prior to the registration of this case. Similarly, the contempt proceedings were also initiated against the respondents before the registration of this F.I.R. The allegation was that the petitioners were guilty of theft of electricity and that as a result of the raid an electric meter alongwith locks and wire were taken into possession by the raiding party. There is, however, no evidence to- show that the meter recovered from the premises of the petitioners was found tampered with or that the petitioner were unauthorizedly consuming the energy. It is admitted and is also evident from the record that the premises were raided by the raiding party in absence of the petitioner and his family members. The raiding party should have waited and summoned the petitioner or any other male member of his family to find out as to whether or not the electricity was being stolen by the petitioners. In absence of such kind of evidence, available on record, the allegations, having been levelled against the petitioners cannot be held sufficient to register conviction against them. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent WAPDA was wholly unable .to show as to what evidence he would provide before the Court and also what offence was committed by the petitioners in the given circumstances. The background of the case, would demonstrate that the petitioners were proceedings against on account of civil litigation which commenced at the instance of the petitioners. I, therefore, feel no hesitation to say that the registration of the case was based on mala fides and as such it could not be sustained in law. This being so, in my view the registration of the case against the petitioners was wholly unwarranted in law A and facts of the case. In consequence, the impugned proceedings arising out of F.I.R. No.98, dated 26-4-1988 registered with Police Station, Daska are hereby quashed being without lawful authority and of no legal consequence. This petition succeeds and is allowed with no order as to costs.

N.H.Q./M-1471/L

Petition allowed.