State vs Dharmendra Singh — 524/2024
Case under The Uttar Pradesh Electricity Act,2003 Section 138(1)(b). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 03rd April 2026.
Sessions Case
CNR: UPKJ010017582024
e-Filing Number
28-03-2024
Filing Number
1642/2024
Filing Date
30-03-2024
Registration No
524/2024
Registration Date
08-04-2024
Court
District and Session Judge
Judge
2-ADJ I
Decision Date
03rd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
1019
Police Station
ANTI POWER THEFT THANA KANNAUJ
Year
2021
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State
Respondent(s)
Dharmendra Singh
Hearing History
Judge: 2-ADJ I
Disposed
For Judgment
Appearance of accused
Appearance of accused
Appearance of accused
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 03-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 28-03-2026 | For Judgment | |
| 27-03-2026 | Appearance of accused | |
| 09-03-2026 | Appearance of accused | |
| 20-02-2026 | Appearance of accused |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Additional Sessions Court in Kannauj acquitted Dharmendra Singh of charges under Section 138(1)(b) of the Electricity Act, 2003 for alleged electricity theft. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the required elements of the offense, including the extent of electricity misuse and financial gain obtained, and no independent technical/mechanical examination report was submitted to substantiate the allegations. The accused had also paid all outstanding electricity dues and penalties, and the electricity department raised no objection to case closure. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Additional Sessions Court in Kannauj acquitted Dharmendra Singh of charges under Section 138(1)(b) of the Electricity Act, 2003 for alleged electricity theft. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the required elements of the offense, including the extent of electricity misuse and financial gain obtained, and no independent technical/mechanical examination report was submitted to substantiate the allegations. The accused had also paid all outstanding electricity dues and penalties, and the electricity department raised no objection to case closure. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts