STATE OF MYSORE Vs. CAMPBELL R D AND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In Criminal Case No. 791 of 1959 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate F. C. Gokak, the respondents were tried for offences under S. 92 read with S. 55 of the Factories Act, 1948 (63 of 1948) (which shall be hereinafter called the "Act"), but they were acquitted. The State has come up in appeal against the order of acquittal.

(2.) The complaint against the respondent is that on 18 May 1959 three of their workers were found working during the midday interval. The Court below did not go into the merits of the case. It acquitted the respondent solely on the ground that the complainant had no competence to file the complaint in question. The complainant claims to be an inspector of factories serving in the Belgaum area. By a curious process of reasoning the court below came to the conclusion that for every area as such, a separate inspector of factories should be appointed; there is no proof that the complainant was appointed for the Belgaum area; and therefore, he had no competence to file the complaint. It is not disputed that the complainant is an inspector of factories appointed under S. 8(1) of the "Act." Section 105 provides for filing of complaints. That section says : "(1) No Court shall take cognizance of any offence under this Act except on complaint by, or with the previous sanction in writing of, an inspector."

(3.) If this section is read by itself, there can be no doubt that "an inspector" of factories can file a complaint under the "Act." As mentioned earlier, there is no dispute that the complainant is "an inspector" within the meaning of that expression found in S. 105. But the court below thought that in view of S. 8(1) of the "Act" "an inspector" of factories could operate only within a particular area to which he was appointed. In our view the court below did not properly construe S. 8(1). That section says :