T. SURENDRAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One and the same person is the petitioner in both the cases. He is the 3rd accused in S.T.918/2005 and S.T.924/2005. Both are cases on the file of the court of the judicial magistrate of the first class, Tirur. Those cases are now pending in the said court as L.P.C.106/2010 and L.P.C.13/2008 respectively. The Crl M.Cs are filed to get quashed those cases to the extent they relate to the petitioner. The relief is sought under section 482 of Crimial P.C., 1973

(2.) Heard Sri.Babu S.Nair, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil, the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent and Sri.B.Jayasurya, the learned public prosecutor who appears for the 1st respondent.

(3.) The petitioner is the 3rd accused in two cases referred to above. The offence alleged against him in both the cases is the one punishable under paragraph 42(d) of the Employees' Pension Scheme read with Sec. 14A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short the Act). He has been charged for the violation of paragraph 42(d) of the Employees' Pension Scheme. The allegation is that the 1st accused (in both the cases), a company, defaulted contribution to the Employees' Pension Scheme. It is alleged that the amount defaulted during the year 2003 was Rs 19,992.00 and in the next year was Rs 19,243.00. There is no dispute between the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent that the entire amount due has been realised by the provident fund organization from the 1st accused company. Such realization of the dues is admitted in the counter-statements filed in the present proceedings by the 2nd respondent.