Madhya Pradesh High Court: In a writ petition against the order of Officer In-charge, MPMKVVCL, Shivpuri which invoked Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003, and imposed a civil liability of Rs.1,93,561/- on the petitioner on account of alleged theft of electricity, a single-judge bench of Milind Ramesh Phadke, J., reaffirmed that in matters concerning theft of electricity, the determination of civil liability falls within the exclusive domain of the Special Court and quashed the impugned order.
The petitioner challenged the impugned order and contended that Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003, falls under Chapter XIV, which deals with “Offences and Penalties” and does not empower authorities to unilaterally determine civil liability. It was contended that as per Section 154(5) of the Electricity Act, it is the Special Court constituted under Section 153 that has the exclusive jurisdiction to determine civil liability in cases involving theft of electricity. The petitioner argued that the respondent authorities had usurped the powers of the Special Court by unilaterally imposing a civil liability, which is beyond their jurisdiction.
However, the respondent argued for the dismissal of petition and contended that there was no illegality in the impugned order and the authorities were justified in imposing the liability and demanding payment based on the provisions of the Electricity Act. It was
The Court examined the provisions of Sections 135 and 154 of the Electricity Act and observed that under Section 154(5), the Special Court has exclusive jurisdiction to determine both penal action and civil liability in cases of electricity theft. The Court also noted that in Sangita v. State of M.P., 2008 SCC OnLine MP 328, it was held that civil liability arising from theft of electricity must be determined by the Special Court.
The Court held that since the law explicitly states that the Special Court alone is empowered to impose civil liability, the authorities acted beyond their jurisdiction in issuing the impugned order. The Court found the order dated 23.07.2022 to be legally unsustainable and accordingly quashed the same. However, the Court granted liberty to the respondents to approach the Competent Court under Section 154 of the Electricity Act for appropriate legal action.
[Naveen Kumar Jain v. M.P. Madhya Kshetr Avidyut Vikas Co. Ltd., 2025 SCC OnLine MP 1474, Decided on 24-02-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Anchit Jain, Counsel for the Petitioner
Mr. Prateek Kulshrestha, Counsel for the Respondent 1
