Court mandates adherence to natural justice and procedural fairness in electricity theft cases under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court, in a landmark judgment, has set aside several assessment orders related to electricity theft under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003, citing procedural lapses and non-compliance with the principles of natural justice. The judgment, delivered by Justice Jagmohan Bansal, underscores the necessity for authorities to provide affected consumers with the opportunity to be heard and confront adverse material before passing assessment orders.
The Court examined petitions filed by Rattan Singh and others against the State of Haryana and its electricity distribution entities, challenging the legality of assessment orders that demanded substantial sums as electricity theft charges without affording the consumers due process. The judgment highlighted that the assessing officers failed to differentiate between unauthorized use of electricity under Section 126 and theft under Section 135, and did not provide consumers with a chance to rebut the allegations.
The Court elucidated that, while civil courts lack jurisdiction over such assessment orders under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, consumers aggrieved by orders under Section 135 can seek recourse in Special Courts. These courts are empowered to determine civil liabilities independent of criminal proceedings, which may or may not be initiated. The judgment also emphasized that compounding of offences does not extinguish civil liabilities for electricity charges, reinforcing that civil and criminal liabilities operate independently.
Justice Bansal's judgment mandates that assessment orders under Section 135 must be preceded by proper notice and an opportunity for the consumer to present their case, ensuring adherence to the principles of natural justice. The ruling asserts that Special Courts must entertain petitions against assessment orders even before taking cognizance of any complaint or police report, thus ensuring that consumers are not left without remedy.
The Court's decision is expected to have significant implications for electricity theft cases, urging authorities to adopt a more transparent and fair approach in their assessments and reinforcing the judicial oversight over administrative actions in the electricity sector.
Bottom Line:
Principles of natural justice must be complied with while framing assessment under Section 135 of Electricity Act, 2003. Special Court has power to entertain petitions against assessment orders under Section 135, even before taking cognizance. Civil liability is independent of criminal liability, and compounding of offences does not extinguish civil liability.
Statutory provision(s):
Sections 126, 135, 145, 152, 153, 154 of the Electricity Act, 2003; Section 183 of the Electricity Act, 2003; Electricity (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2005; Haryana Electricity Regulatory Commission (Electricity Supply Code) Regulations, 2014; Sections 468, 300 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.
Rattan Singh v. State of Haryana, (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc id # 2869383
