Monetary & criminal liability–
We find that Section 126 of the Act deals with assessment of electricity charges payable by such person (consumer) for unauthorized use of electricity whereas Section 135 deals with the cases of theft of electricity. The Board is at liberty to take recourse to the provisions of Section 126 or/and 135 of the Act against such person/consumer as provided therein in accordance with law. In these circumstances, if the Board initiates any action against any person/consumer, then such action must be brought to its logical end in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the Act after affording an opportunity to such person/consumer. .....Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co.Ltd.=VS=Appellate Authority, (Civil), 2018 (1) [4 LM (SC) 57] ....View Full Judgment

The Electricity Act
Section 135 r/w
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 482
Quash– The filing of FIR after passing of the award by the Lok Adalat was wholly unjust and illegal and the same was not permissible being against the terms of the award and also for want of any subsisting cause of action arising out of demand. It is, therefore, not legally sustainable–– Settlement of the case and receiving the payment, the BSES filed FIR No.548/15 against the appellant on 21.03.2015 under Section 135 of the Electricity Act in P.S. Malviya Nagar, South Delhi in relation to the same demand. ––The appellant felt aggrieved by the registration of FIR against him and filed a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “the Code”) in the High Court challenging its registration as being bad in law. ––The High Court, by impugned order, dismissed the petition, which has given rise to filing of the present appeal by way special leave by the appellant in this Court. ––In our opinion, the effect of passing of an award was that dispute in relation to the demand raised by the BSES was settled amicably between the parties leaving no dispute surviving. The original demand was for Rs.97,786/whereas the dispute was settled at Rs.83,120/in full and final satisfaction of the claim made by the BSES against the appellant. ––The filing of FIR after passing of the award by the Lok Adalat was wholly unjust and illegal and the same was not permissible being against the terms of the award and also for want of any subsisting cause of action arising out of demand. It is, therefore, not legally sustainable. ––The appeal succeeds and is accordingly allowed. The impugned order is set aside. As a consequence, the petition filed under Section 482 of the Code by the appellant is allowed and FIR No. 548/2015 registered in PS Malviya Nagar, South Delhi against the appellant is hereby quashed. .....Saleem Ahmed =VS= State, (Criminal), 2023(1) [14 LM (SC) 8] ....View Full Judgment