NARANBHAI PRAGJIBHAI GOHILversusPASCHIM GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LIMITED

   C/SCA/1050/2025                              JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2026




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

             R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1050 of 2025


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Sd/-

==========================================================

          Approved for Reporting               Yes          No
                                                            No
==========================================================
                     NARANBHAI PRAGJIBHAI GOHIL
                               Versus
                 PASCHIM GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LIMITED
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR V A ZALA(11441) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR MITESH L RANGRAS(3324) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK

                           Date : 07/04/2026

                             JUDGMENT

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Mitesh L.Rangras,
learned counsel waives service of notice of rule for and on
behalf of respondent No.1. With consent of the learned
counsels appearing for both the sides, the petition is
taken up for final hearing today.

2. Present petition is filed by the petitioner under Articles
14, 19, 21 and 226 of the Constitution of India r/w the
provisions under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003,



                               Page 1 of 10
  C/SCA/1050/2025                         JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2026




with below mentioned relief/s:-
     “ 8(A) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to admit and
     allow this petition;

     (B) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue
     appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing and
     setting aside the notice dated 12.11.2024 issued by
     respondent No.1 which is at annexure-A

     (C) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue
     appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing and
     setting aside the notice and supplementary bill dated
     07.11.2024 issued by the respondent PGVCL Company
     which is at annexure - I;

     (D) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue
     appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondent
     No.    1    to     immediately    provide      electricity
     connection/meter being Meter Serial No. PT682285
     (Customer No. 60259/15435/0) and provide electricity
     power to the petitioner by quashing the illegal action of
     respondent No. 1;

     (E) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased that, pending
     admission, final hearing and disposal of this petition,
     direct the respondent no. 1 to provide electricity
     connection/meter being Meter Serial No. PT682285
     (Customer No. 60259/15435/0) and provide electricity
     power to the petitioner upon such terms and conditions
     as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit;

     (F) Grant such other and further relief as this court may
     think fit in the interest of justice.”

3. The facts giving rise to present petition are that the
present petitioner is the owner of a Non Agricultural land
being Survey (Block) No. 147p1/1 admeasuring 2432
Square Meter located in Village: Lakhanka, Tal: Ghogha,
Dist Bhavnagar. The land is being used by one Jentibhai
Kantibhai Chuahan since 2022. C0114. The petitioner is

                           Page 2 of 10
   C/SCA/1050/2025                                      JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2026




the customer of Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Limited
being customer No. 602259/15435/0 and owner enjoys 3
phase electricity connection/meter vide Meter Serial No.
PT682285 with power load of 30 KW in the premises of
his   land.          The   petitioner    and      the      land      user      have
consistently paid electricity bills to Paschim Gujarat Vij
Company Limited (PGVCL) on time. There have been no
prior complaints or defaults against the owner or the
user.

3.1 On 17.10.2024, a fault occurred in one phase of the
electricity meter, leaving the petitioner without power.
The petitioner submits that out of 3 phases one phase was
burned due to some electric shock circuit. Therefore, on
the same day the petitioner had made registered a
complaint being Complaint No. 119682 at PGVCL Fault
Centre, City 2 Division, Bhavnagar stating the facts that
there is a power cut in his meter so kindly send
technicians as soon as possible but no one had visited.
The petitioner had made several calls and made requests
to send some technician so that they may not have to
suffer. Thereafter, on 27.10.2024, the petitioner had
made one more complaint being complaint No. 119905
before the same department so that they may come and
fix the issue at earliest.

3.2 After making several requests and phone calls to the
concerned department one person came to see that what


                                   Page 3 of 10
   C/SCA/1050/2025                            JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2026




exact the issue was. The present petitioner was facing big
loss in his business due to inaction of PGVCL Company
therefore he had warned the concerned persons that he
will file a case against them before the consumer forum
therefore kindly resolve the issue at earliest. Thereafter
keeping grudge of the same, on 07.11.2024 at 3:25 A.M
midnight, one team/squad from PGVCL Company came
for checking and disconnected the electric wires/power
and uninstalled electric meter belonging to the petitioner.
and the concerned officers had issued notice dated
07.11.2024 under section 135 of The Electricity Act, 2003
alleging that one Jentibhai Kanjibhai Chuahan is using the
electricity meter and the petitioner is stealing electricity
by directly installing wires in main line (Poles).

3.3   Thereafter,    on   same      day    i.e.   07.11.2024,          the
petitioner, through his land user had issued legal notice
through advocate to the concerned officer i.e. Deputy
Ijner of PGVCL Company at Ghogha, Bhavnagar stating
that he has not acted in manner as alleged against him
and therefore kindly return the meter and electricity
connection so that he may not have to face further loss.

3.4 Thereafter, on 09.11.2024, the police Inspector,
GUVNL Police Station, Bhavnagar had issued notice
dated 09.11.2024 Under Sec. 35(3)(6) of BNSS to the
present petitioner stating to remain present within 7 days
of receipt of notice and amount of Stealing Electricity


                            Page 4 of 10
   C/SCA/1050/2025                       JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2026




with compounding charges i.e. Rupees 23,60,367.71/- was
mentioned.

3.5 Thereafter, on 07.11.2024 the supplementary bill to
the tune of Rs. 22,15,595.71/- was issued by Deputy
Engineer (O&M) PGVCL Ghogha Sub-Division in the
name of the present petitioner and last date for payment
was showed 14.11.2024 being bill no. 189817 along with
notice.

3.6 In view of the above facts the petitioner has preferred
petition against the action of the respondent.

4. Heard Mr. V.A. Zala, learned Counsel for the petitioner
and Mr. Mitesh L. Rangras, learned counsel for the
respondent.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
the action of the respondents of removing the electricity
connection / meter is illegal, against the provision of law,
He has submitted that the respondents disconnected the
electricity connection and imposed penalties without
giving the petitioner an opportunity to be heard. He has
submitted that he was not granted any opportunity of
hearing by the PGVCL company and without following
due procedure of law, the respondents have acted in
illegal manner which has caused huge loss to the
petitioner as he was held liable for the illegal theft of
electricity.

                          Page 5 of 10
   C/SCA/1050/2025                       JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2026




5.1 Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
in several judgments of High Courts the courts have
expressed their views that the opportunity of hearing
should be given to the person who is facing accusation of
theft of electricity and the supplementary bill should be
assessed accordingly as given under regulations 7.5.6 of
the regulations of 2005. However, in present case without
following any due procedure the supplementary bill was
issued.

5.2 In view of the above, learned counsel for the
petitioner urges before the Court that present petition
may be allowed and impugned notice dated 12.11.2024
issued by the respondent No.1 and the supplementary bill
dated 7.11.2024 issued by respondent PGVCL may be
quashed and set aside.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent
has opposed the petition. He has submitted that the
petitioner does not want to pay the amount as prescribed
under the provisions of law and to evade the payment,
present petition is filed, as same is nothing but abuse of
process of law and therefore, considering the conduct of
the petitioner, present petition does not deserve to be
dismissed.

6.1 Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted
that when a right or liability is created by a statute, which

                          Page 6 of 10
   C/SCA/1050/2025                          JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2026




gives a special remedy for enforcing it, the remedy
provided by that statute must only be availed of, but in
present case the petitioner is overreaching the same and
therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief as
prayed.

6.2 In view of the above submissions, learned counsel for
the respondent urges before the Court that present
petition may not be entertained and the same may be
dismissed.

7. I have perused the relevant documents and material
placed on record. I have also gone through the impugned
notice as well as supplementary bill issued by the
authority.

8. It appears that an earlier petition was filed on behalf of
the tenant of the present petitioner, challenging a similar
bill, being Special Civil Application No. 17676 of 2024.
The said petition came to be withdrawn by the petitioner
vide order dated 01.01.2025. No liberty was granted by
this Court to file a fresh petition or to initiate appropriate
proceedings. However, under the garb of the present
petition, the petitioner has challenged the very same
order, which is not permissible in law, as it is hit by the
principle of res judicata.

9. The earlier petition having been withdrawn without
liberty, the present petition is not maintainable in the

                             Page 7 of 10
   C/SCA/1050/2025                           JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2026




eyes of law. Therefore, the present petition deserves to be
dismissed.

10. At this stage, it is appropriate to refer the decision of
the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Uttar Pradesh Power
Corporation Limited and Others vs. Anis Ahmad reported
in (2013) 8 SCC 491, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court
held as under:-

      “35. From a bare reading of Section 126 and Sections
      135 to 140, it is clear that while acts of unauthorized use
      of electricity attracts civil consequence of penal charge
      of electricity, twice the rate of electricity, for which
      assessment is made by assessing officer under Section
      126; the      very same acts of unauthorized use of
      electricity,     constitute     offences      under Section
      135 to 140 for which sentence and fine has been
      prescribed.

      36. As per Section 153 of the Electricity Act, 2003,
      Special Courts are to be constituted for speedy trial for
      the offences referred to in Sections 135 to 140. The said
      Section reads as follows:

              “153. Constitution of Special Courts.-
              (1) The State Government may, for the purposes of
              providing speedy trial of offences referred to in
              [sections     135 to 140 and section     150],   by
              notification in the Official Gazette, constitute as
              many Special Courts as may be necessary for such
              area or areas, as may be specified in the
              notification.
              (2) A Special Court shall consist of a single Judge
              who shall be appointed by the State Government
              with the concurrence of the High Court.
              (3) A person shall not be qualified for appointment
              as a judge of a Special Court unless he was,
              immediately     before    such    appointment,   an
              Additional District and Sessions Judge.


                              Page 8 of 10
  C/SCA/1050/2025                             JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2026




             (4) Where the office of the Judge of a Special Court
             is vacant, or such Judge is absent from the ordinary
             place of sitting of such Special Court, or he is
             incapacitated by illness or otherwise for the
             performance of his duties, any urgent business in
             the Special Court shall be disposed of--
                   (a) by a Judge, if any, exercising jurisdiction
                   in the Special Court;
                   (b) where there is no such other Judge
                   available, in accordance with the direction of
                   District    and    Sessions    Judge     having
                   jurisdiction over the oridinary place of sitting
                   of Special Court, as notified under sub-section
                   (1).”

10. It is also appropriate to have a glance of the decision
of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Kerala State
Electricity Board and others vs. Thomas Joseph Alias
Thomas M.J. and others reported in (2023) 11 SCC 700,
decision of this Court in the case of Deputy Engineer (O
and M) vs. Nasir Hussain Abdulkadar Shaikh reported in
2015 LawSuit (Guj) 1599, Paschim Gujarat Vij Company
Limited and others vs. Alimamad Aaamad Hingora and
Ors. reported in 2015 LawSuit (Guj) 284, Paschim Gujarat
Vij Corporation Ltd. vs. District Consumer Redressal
Forum Bhuj and Anr. reported in 2011(3) GLR 2286,
Uttar Gujarat Vij Company Ltd. Through Deputy Engineer
vs. Naranbhai N. Chaudhary, President reported in 2014
(35) GHJ 1, Madhya           Gujarat Vij Company Limited vs.
Appellate Authority and Electrical Inspector reported in
2023 (2) GLH 67, wherein similar view has been taken by
the Court.          In view of the aforesaid decisions present
petition does not deserve to be entertained.

                               Page 9 of 10
      C/SCA/1050/2025                                                               JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2026




11. In view of the above and in view of the fact that
earlier the petitioner has already approached this Court
by way of filing writ petition for the similar relief and
withdrawn the same, the present petition is hereby
dismissed. However, it is open to the petitioner to take
appropriate recourse as provided under the statute. If a
supplementary bill is issued under Section 135 of the
Electricity Act, it is a settled principle of law, as
enunciated by this Court and the Hon’ble Apex Court in a
series of judgments, that Sections 135 to 140 of the
Electricity Act pertain to cases of unauthorized use of
electricity or theft and in such matters, the concerned
authority is required to initiate appropriate proceedings
before the Special Court. Therefore, if the petitioner
wishes to avail such remedy, it is open to him to file
appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. The
petition is hereby dismissed. Rule is discharged.



                                                                                             Sd/-
                                                                         (HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
SURESH SOLANKI
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: SURESHKUMAR MOTIBHAI SOLANKI(HC00208), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 13/04/2026 17:00:00




                                                       Page 10 of 10