STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. SHAH ACHARYA AND CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . This is a States appeal for enhancement of sentence passed against the respondents in a case in which they were charged in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Palanpur for contravening the provisions of Rule 25(2) of the Minimum Wages Rules 1961 (the Rules) punishable under sec. 22A of the Minimum Wages Act 1948 (the Act).

(2.) But Miss Shah the learned Advocate appearing for the respondents-accused submits that in the instant case so far as accused Nos. 2 to 5 are concerned they were prosecuted along with the company that is- the firm of which they were the partners by virtue of the fact that they were the partners of the said company which is alleged to have committed the offence. Miss Shah drew my attention to sec. 22-C which deals with the offences by the companies Sub-sec. (1) provides that if the person committing any offence under this Act is a company every person who at the time the offence was committed was in charge of and was responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company as well as the company shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly. The proviso is not relevant for our purpose. Sub-sec. (2) provides:

(3.) It is true as pointed out by Mr. Chhaya that the accused here have been convicted on their plea of guilty. But this would not make any difference so far as the legality of the order of conviction and sentence is concerned because if no prosecution can lie against the accused persons then any plea of guilty to such a charge which cannot be levelled against them and which in fact has not been levelled against them would not entitle the court to pass an order of conviction accepting such plea of guilty. The order passed therefore is without jurisdiction and cannot be sustaineed so far as accused Nos. 2 to 5 are concerned.