Paschim Gujarat Vij Co. Ltd. vs ROSHANBEN HUSAINBHAI MUDRAKH MALEK Advocate - M O ISHANI — 280/2023
Case under Electricity Act, 2003 Section 135. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 30th April 2026.
ELEC - SPECIAL CASE - ELECTRICITY
CNR: GJJM010038152023
Filing Number
280/2023
Filing Date
16-Oct-2023
Registration No
280/2023
Registration Date
16-Oct-2023
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT JANMAGAR
Judge
15-4th Addl District Judge
Decision Date
30-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 12-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
2062
Police Station
GUVNL POLICE STATION - JAMNAGAR DISTRICT
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Paschim Gujarat Vij Co. Ltd.
Adv. P J PARMAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.ROSHANBEN HUSAINBHAI MUDRAKH MALEK Advocate - M O ISHANI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
30-Apr-2026
JudegementView PDF
Case Summary: 280/2023 Court Decision: The Special Electricity Act Court acquitted the accused, Roshanben Husainbhai Mudrakh Malek, under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the electricity theft charge beyond reasonable doubt. Key Reasoning: The court identified critical procedural and evidentiary deficiencies in the prosecution's case, including: (1) the checking/inspection was conducted without proper authorization or independent witnesses, violating Section 135(2) of the Act and CrPC Sections 100-102; (2) failure to establish the accused's continuous possession of the premises through revenue records or other documentary evidence; (3) incomplete panchnama lacking meter and wire details; (4) inconsistencies in the accused's residential address across identity documents; and (5) the gap between the alleged offense date (02/06/2023) and the panchnama date (12/08/2023). The court invoked precedent from *State of Gujarat v. Jayantibhai Jivanbhai Gohil (2023)* emphasizing the necessity of proper meter and wire verification during electricity theft prosecutions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
30-Apr-2026
Disposed
4th Addl District Judge
-
23-Apr-2026
Final Arguments
4th Addl District Judge
-
04-Apr-2026
Final Arguments
4th Addl District Judge
-
16-Mar-2026
Final Arguments
4th Addl District Judge
-
18-Feb-2026
Final Arguments
4th Addl District Judge
-
29-Jan-2026
Final Arguments
4th Addl District Judge
-
03-Jan-2026
Final Arguments
4th Addl District Judge
-
26-Dec-2025
Final Arguments
4th Addl District Judge
-
03-Dec-2025
Final Arguments
4th Addl District Judge
-
12-Nov-2025
Final Arguments
4th Addl District Judge
-
08-Oct-2025
Final Arguments
4th Addl District Judge
-
15-Sep-2025
Final Arguments
4th Addl District Judge
-
25-Aug-2025
Final Arguments
4th Addl District Judge
-
07-Aug-2025
Further Statement
4th Addl District Judge
-
10-Jul-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
18-Jun-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
31-May-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
4th Addl District Judge
-
08-May-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
3rd Addl District Judge
-
28-Feb-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Addl.district & Sessions Judge
-
20-Dec-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Addl.district & Sessions Judge
-
22-Oct-2024
Evidence Of Prosecution
Addl.district & Sessions Judge
-
29-Aug-2024
Framing Of Charge/Plea
Addl.district & Sessions Judge
-
19-Jul-2024
Framing Of Charge/Plea
Addl.district & Sessions Judge
-
10-May-2024
Opening Up Of Case By Prosecution
3rd Addl District Judge
-
01-Mar-2024
Opening Up Of Case By Prosecution
3rd Addl District Judge
-
15-Dec-2023
Opening Up Of Case By Prosecution
3rd Addl District Judge
-
25-Oct-2023
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
16-Oct-2023
Case filed
Registration No. 280/2023
Case Summary: 280/2023 Court Decision: The Special Electricity Act Court acquitted the accused, Roshanben Husainbhai Mudrakh Malek, under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the electricity theft charge beyond reasonable doubt. Key Reasoning: The court identified critical procedural and evidentiary deficiencies in the prosecution's case, including: (1) the checking/inspection was conducted without proper authorization or independent witnesses, violating Section 135(2) of the Act and CrPC Sections 100-102; (2) failure to establish the accused's continuous possession of the premises through revenue records or other documentary evidence; (3) incomplete panchnama lacking meter and wire details; (4) inconsistencies in the accused's residential address across identity documents; and (5) the gap between the alleged offense date (02/06/2023) and the panchnama date (12/08/2023). The court invoked precedent from *State of Gujarat v. Jayantibhai Jivanbhai Gohil (2023)* emphasizing the necessity of proper meter and wire verification during electricity theft prosecutions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts