STATE OF GOA Vs. NAMITA TRIPATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The present Appeal calls in question the correctness of the judgment dtd. 6/9/2021 passed by the High Court of Bombay at Goa in Stamp Number Main No. 944 of 2020 (F). By the said judgment, the High Court allowed the prayer of the respondent herein and quashed the order dtd. 4/12/2019 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) at Panaji in Criminal Case No. LC/19/2019/C. By the said order, the Ld. JMFC had issued process to the respondent pursuant to the complaint filed by the appellants alleging violation by the respondent of the provisions of the Factories Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1948') and thereby committing offences punishable under Sec. 92 thereof.

(3.) The facts lie in a narrow compass. Pursuant to the inspection conducted on 20/5/2019 in the premises of the respondent wherein the business of Professional Laundry Service was carried on, it was found that the respondent did not possess factory approved plans as required under Rule 3 of the Goa Factories Rules, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules') read with Sec. 6 of the Act of 1948; that the premises were being used as a factory without obtaining a valid factory licence in violation of Rule 4 of the Rules read with Sec. 6 of the Act of 1948 and that the respondent had not submitted any application for registration and grant of licence in violation of Rule 6 of the Rules read with Sec. 6 of the Act of 1948. An inspection report was drawn up and the same was furnished by a covering letter dtd. 24/5/2019 with the "occupier of the respondent" to report compliance within 15 days.