When there is a specific/special law covering the question of theft of electricity i.e. Section 135 of the Act, the general law contained in Section 379, IPC will not be applicable. Any attempt by the notice to add offence under Section 379 IPC will be a crude devise by the prosecution to overcome the likely objection from the accused about the filing of the complaint instead of registration of FIR. Law is well-settled that special law will prevail over the general law. Once there is a specific provision is the Act in respect of providing of punishment for theft of electricity, no offence under Section 379, IPC could be alleged by the prosecution or later on added during the investigation so as to preempt the taking of plea by the accused that no prosecution for the offence under Section 135 of the Act could be launched except upon a complaint by the authorized officer.
7. That apart, the Electricity Act, 2003, which is a special statute, is a latter piece of legislation, than the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and therefore, it can be safely assumed that the legislature in its wisdom, after considering the general provision of offence of theft under the Indian Penal Code, decided to bring in the specific provision for offence of theft of electricity under the provision of Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003. Therefore, once a person is said to have committed an alleged offence of theft of electricity, no case under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 would lie in view of the specific provision of law contained in the Electricity Act, 2003 in this regard.
