ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has held that in gas theft or meter tampering cases paramount factors required to be examined was the connected load based on appliances actually installed and required taking the load of each in comparison to the pre-determined load of each appliance.

A three-judge bench, headed by Justice Yahya Afridi, and comprising Justice Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi and Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar ruled that on an appeal of Sui Northern Gas Pipelines Limited against the Lahore High Court judgment.

The judgment authored by Justice Mazhar noted that OGRA has approved the “Procedure for Dealing with Theft of Gas” in 2005. It said the procedure addresses several aspects of gas theft, inter alia, the action that can be taken by the company in case of theft, such as conducting a raid at the premises and/or disconnecting gas supply to such subscriber.

The court observed that in the present case no inventory of the appliances was produced, if any, prepared by the raiding team. Neither it was established in the evidence by the petitioner’s department that the procedure was followed in letter and spirit before fixing the liability of dues, nor it was pleaded that the liability was assessed vis-à-vis the actual load after physical examination and verification of all appliances and equipment installed or in use at the respondent’s premises.

The judgment said according to Article 117 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, if any person desires a court to give a judgment as to any legal right or liability, depending on the existence of facts which he asserts, he must prove that those facts exist and the burden of proof lies on him.

The lawsuits bring to an end on preponderance of evidence in which the court has to see which party has discharged the onus of proof. Merely submitting the calculation sheet of the dues on account of alleged pilferage was not sufficient.

The judgment said that the trial court not only settled the issues but also allowed an equal opportunity to both parties to lead evidence.

The aspect of whether the liability was assessed according to the sanctioned load or not was to be proved in the trial court and such calculation sheet cannot be considered as the gospel truth unless the raiding team ascertained the actual load and consumption according to the appliances and equipment being used by the subscriber and confronted the subscriber or their representative at the time of raid in the case of theft of gas or tampered meter.

Lawsuits are determined on preponderance or weighing the scale of probabilities in which the Court has to see which party has succeeded to prove his case and discharged the onus of proof.

The legal principle “separate the grain from the chaff” obligates the court to scrutinise and evaluate the evidence recorded in the lis and judge the quality, and not the quantity, of evidence which has been done properly in the case without any non-reading or misreading of evidence by the Trial Court or the High Court concurrently.

According to the case, a consumer Muhammad Arshad (respondent) filed a lawsuit with the prayer that the gas utility bill was wrongly calculated by the company (SNGPL) and should be corrected as per actual consumption. He further sought a permanent injunction from recovery of the bill amount and disconnection of gas supply to the premises.

The civil suit was decreed by the additional district judge/Gas Utility Court, Rawalpindi in favour of the respondent. The company filed an appeal against the trial court’s decision before the Lahore High Court, which dismissed its appeal.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2023