STATE BY CESC VIGILANCE, MYSURU vs VEENA — 111/2026
Case under Electricity Act Section U/S 135. Disposed: Uncontested--SETTLED IN LOK ADALATH on 14th March 2026.
SPL.C - SPECIAL CASES
CNR: KAMS010020472026
Filing Number
111/2026
Filing Date
12-03-2026
Registration No
111/2026
Registration Date
12-03-2026
Court
PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSURU
Judge
426-I ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE MYSURU
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--SETTLED IN LOK ADALATH
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
STATE BY CESC VIGILANCE, MYSURU
Respondent(s)
VEENA
PRASANNA KUMAR G P
RANGANATH
MANEESH
SHIVASHANKAR
Hearing History
Judge: 426-I ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE MYSURU
Disposed
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Lok Adalath allowed a compromise petition filed by CESC Vigilance (complainant) and the accused (Veena, Prasanna Kumar G P, and Ranganath) under Section 152 of the Indian Electricity Act 2003. The court found the offences were compoundable and the accused had deposited the required fine amount, making the compromise lawful and voluntary. Consequently, the accused were acquitted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Lok Adalath allowed a compromise petition filed by CESC Vigilance (complainant) and the accused (Veena, Prasanna Kumar G P, and Ranganath) under Section 152 of the Indian Electricity Act 2003. The court found the offences were compoundable and the accused had deposited the required fine amount, making the compromise lawful and voluntary. Consequently, the accused were acquitted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts