Authority: Patna High Court (High Court of Judicature at Patna)

Order Date: 11-09-2026

Case Overview

  • Petitioner: North Bihar Power Distribution Company Ltd (through its Chief Engineer Commercial) and associated officials.
  • Respondents: The State of Bihar (through Principal Secretary, Energy Department) and M/s Kiran Cold Storage (partner: Sri Pankaj Kumar Nayak).
  • Case No.: 18682 of 2016.
  • Relief Sought: Issuance of a writ of certiorari to set aside the appellate order dated 21.03.2016 passed by the Appellate Authority under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003, which limited the punitive demand assessment to 14 days and stated the order was subject to a final order by the Special Court under Section 154.
  • Background Facts:
  • Inspection of Kiran Cold Storage premises on 22.07.2011 uncovered extensive tampering of the meter box, meter body, terminal seals, and ultrasonic seals.
  • An inspection report and seizure list were prepared; an FIR was lodged under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003.
  • A provisional assessment of approximately Rs.48.74 lakh was made, later reduced to about Rs.41.92 lakh by the final assessment order dated 09.08.2011.
  • Appeal: Respondent No.2 appealed under Section 127. The Appellate Authority’s order dated 21.03.2016 did not dispute the theft but confined the assessment period to 14 days (from 09.07.2011 – the date of the last meter reading – to 22.07.2011 – the inspection date), reasoning that unauthorised use could not be presumed beyond the last reading.
  • Petitioner’s Arguments:
  • The restriction to 14 days was erroneous because routine meter readings cannot confirm the meter was untampered on the last reading date.
  • Inspection reports and seizure evidence clearly established theft.
  • MRI report of the meter (from the criminal case order sheet) showed consumption was being obstructed by a remotely operated implanted device, with tampering commencing from 16.08.2010 – about twelve months before the inspection.
  • The MRI report and inspection material together demonstrate that the period of manipulation is ascertainable, rendering the 14‑day limitation unjustified.
  • Respondent’s Counter‑Argument: The issue is no longer res integra; it is covered by the order dated 21.11.2025 in CWJC No. 19868 of 2013 (The South Bihar Power Distribution Company Ltd. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) and the judgment in Mosmat Swaran @ Swaran Man Ra Vs. The State of Bihar (2012) 2 PLJR 229. Hence, the present writ may be disposed of on the same terms.
  • Court’s Reference: The Court cited the earlier decision in The South Bihar Power Distribution Company Ltd. where it held that, under Section 154(5) & (6), a Special Court is constituted to determine civil liability for energy theft and directed the petitioner to file a separate petition before that Special Court.

Final Outcome

  • The writ petition is disposed of in accordance with the order passed in CWJC No. 19868 of 2013.
  • The petitioner is directed to file a separate petition before the Special Court where the criminal proceeding is pending, challenging the impugned order dated 21.03.2016, within 30 days.
  • The Special Court, upon receipt of such an application, shall dispose of it by a reasoned order in accordance with law.
  • All interlocutory applications, if any, are also stood disposed of.

Topics: Electricity Theft, Special Court Referral