TMI Blog1964 (8) TMI 73X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erned is the Indian Electricity Act, 1910. Section 39 of the Act, so far as material, provides, Whoever dishonestly abstracts, consumes or uses any energy shall be deemed to have committed theft within the meaning of the Indian Penal Code . It is not in dispute that the appellant had committed the theft mentioned in this section. Section 50 of the Act provides, No prosecution shall be instituted against any person for any offence against the Act.... except at the instance of the Government or an Electrical Inspector, or of a person aggrieved by the same. The appellant's contention is that his prosecution was for an offence against the Act and it was incompetent as it had not been established that it had been instituted at the instanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act. It was, therefore, an offence which was created by has section and we are of opinion that the legislature intended section 50 to apply to an offence of this nature. We are in complete agreement with this statement of the law. We may now set out the reasons on which the contrary view was taken and state why we are unable to accept them. In State v. Maganlal Chunilal Bogawat A.I.R. 1956 Bom. 354 it was stated that s. 39 of the Electricity Act only extended the operation of s. 379 (s. 378?) of the Penal Code and Vishwanath's case I.L.R. (1937) All. 102 was wrongly decided as s. 39 expressly made the dishonest abstraction of electrical energy an offence punishable under the Code. In Tulsi Prasad v. The State (1964) 1 Cr. L.J. 472 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt, apart from the question whether an offence can be created by a statutory provision without that provision itself providing for punishment, on which we express no opinion, we think it clear that S. 39 must be read as providing for a punishment. First it is clear to us that the Act contemplated it as doing so, for ss. 48 and 49 271. (F.B.) speak of penalties imposed by s. 39 and acts punishable under it. In Public Prosecutor v. Abdul Wahab (1964) L.W. (Madras) 271. (F.B.) it was stated that the language used in ss. 48 and 49 cannot be regarded as strictly accurate. Such an interpretation is not permitted for the words of an Act of Parliament must be construed so as to give sensible meaning to them. The words ought to be construed ut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne under the Code. We are unable to appreciate this reasoning. If a provision says that something which is not an offence within the meaning of another statute is to be deemed to be such, the offence is, in our view, created by the statute which raises the fiction and not by the statute within which it is to be deemed by that fiction to be included. If the other view was correct, it would have to be held that the offence was one within the last mentioned statute proprio vigore and this clearly it is not. At this stage we might point out that in Abdul Wahab's(1) case it was stated that It can be accepted that s. 39 of the Act creates. an offence. It seems to us that if so much is conceded, it is) impossible to say that s. 50 would not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the legislature's view s. 39 created an offence, it has to be held that was one of the offences to which s. 50 was intended to apply. Lastly, it seems to us that the object of S. 50 is to prevent prosecution for offences against the Act being instituted by anyone who chooses to do so because the offences can be proved by men possessing special qualifications. That is why it is left only to the authorities concerned with the offence and the persons aggrieved by it to initiate the prosecution. There is no dispute that s. 50 would apply to the offences mentioned in ss. 40 to 47. Now it seems to us that if we are right in our view about the object of s. 50, in principle it would be impossible to make any distinction between s. 39 and any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
