Can Special Judge Under Electricity Act Try Case Also Involving Offences Under IPC? Madhya Pradesh High Court Answers

The reference arose out of a case in which the accused was charged U/S 139 Electricity Act, and U/S 279,427 IPC. Since the offence U/S 139 Electricity Act is liable to be tried by a Special Judge appointed under the Electricity Act, the concerned JMFC transferred the aforesaid case U/S 154(2) of Electricity Act, to the Special Court. The Special Judge however, took cognizance of the offence U/S 139 of the Electricity Act only. He thought that being an Additional Session Judge and performing the duties of Special Judge, he couldn't try the accused U/S 279,427 IPC without committal. Hence, the Special Judge sent the following legal issues by way of reference-

(1) should the police file single chargesheet or separate chargesheets (if a single chargesheet is filed whether a special court can take direct cognizance or congizance after committal proceedings);

(2) should the accused be subjected to different jurisdictions (Spl. Court and magistrate court) for same or similar offences committed in the course of same transaction.

Scrutinizing relevant provisions under the Electricity Act, the Court referred to the decision of the Apex Court in Southern Power Distribution Co. of Telangana Ltd. v. Mehdi Agah Karbalai, wherein it was held that Section 151 of the Electricity Act is altogether a new provision, which provides that no court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under the Act except upon a complaint in writing, made by the appropriate Government or appropriate Commission. The Court further observed that the Second Proviso to Section 151 of the Electricity Act empowers the Special Judge to take cognizance for offences U/S 135 to 140, and 150 of the Electricity Act only, but not for the offence under the Indian Penal Code,1860 or any other enactment.

The Court noted the submissions put forth by the Special Judge, wherein he referred to the decision in Gangula Ashok v. State of A.P., whereby, the Supreme Court held that the Court of Sessions, even after being specified as a Special Court, would continue to be essentially a Court of Sessions and when a case is committed by the Magistrate in accordance with the provisions of CRPC, such Special Court can try further under the provisions of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act as well as other provisions like IPC. He further submitted that this procedure could be applied in the Electricity Act. The contention however, was that so far as offences related to the Electricity Act are concerned, there was no need for committal and the Special Court could directly take cognizance, but for offences, such as, under IPC, the Special Court being a Sessions Court could not take cognizance without there being any order of committal.

Examining Section 151 of the Electricity Act, the Court opined that the answer to the query put forth by the Special Judge lies in the second proviso of the Section 151-

The main part of Section 151 says that no Court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under the Act, except upon a complaint in writing made by appropriate Government or appropriate Commission or any of their officer authorised by them. The First Proviso provides that the Court may also take cognizance of an offence punishable under this Act upon a report of a Police Officer...., and as per Second Proviso, it further provides that a special court constituted u/s. 153 shall be competent to take cognizance of an offence without the accused being committed to it for trial. In the second proviso, the only word 'offence' is used and not the words "offence punishable under this Act" as used in the first proviso as well in the main part of Section 151…

So far as the committal part was concerned, the Court held that the Special Court also has powers of Session Court by virtue of Section 155, and therefore, as per the co-joint reading of Second Proviso to Section 151 R/W Section 155, for other offences also, if they are included in the complaint as well as in a police report, the Special Court can take direct cognizance. Having clarified Issue No.1 put forth by the Special Judge, the Court observed that there was no need to consider the eventualities posed by way of Question Nos. 2 and 3-

As per Question Nos. 2 and 3, the accused is likely to be subjected to two different jurisdictions i.e. to the Special Court as well as Magistrate Court for the same or similar offences committed in the course of the same transaction. By way of question No.3, the learned Special Judge has found the possibility of a conflicting verdict for the same or similar offence committed in the course of the same transaction. As per Answer to Question No.1, the Special Court has the power to take cognizance under the Electricity Act and also under the IPC, then, there would no possibility of facing two trials by the accused i.e. before the Special Court or before the Court of Sessions/Magistrate Court for the similar offence.

It was, thus, concluded by the Court that the Special Judge under the Electricity Act can take cognizance of cases that also involve offences punishable under the IPC, and therefore, there won't be a need to file two separate charge-sheets or a possibility of the accused facing trial in two different courts for offences committed in the course of same transaction.

Case Title: In Re. Special Judge (Electricity Act) No.5, Indore

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 57