STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. BHARATBHAI G SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgement and order dated 31st March, 2012 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.23, Ahmedabad in Criminal Case No.2920 of 2008 (Old Criminal Case No.2826 of 1999) whereby he has acquitted the respondents of the offence punishable under section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").

(2.) THE prosecution case is that the complainant ­ Shri D. M. Acharya was appointed as a Factory Inspector under section 8 of the Act and was discharging his duties as such at the relevant time. The accused ­ Shri Bharatbhai G. Shah was the occupant of a factory by the name of Bhavans Industries, situated near Bus Stand, Odhav, Ahmedabad, which was registered under section 2(m)(1) of the Act. Shri P. M. Mistry, Factory Inspector, Ahmedabad visited the factory on 24.5.1999, 18.6.1999 and 13.7.1999, at which point of time, the factory was running. At the time of such visit, it was learnt that on 21.5.1999 in the evening at about 6:30, four labourers were engaged in loading a cement pipe collar in the truck. One of the labourers, viz., Shivsing Ratansinh Daroga lost his balance while lifting the cement pipe collar consequent to which, the collar fell upon him and he was injured and taken for treatment to the Shardaben Hospital, where he expired on 21.5.1999. The truck in which the cement pipe collar was being loaded was bearing registration No.GTF-4242 and had come from Chirag Transport Company. The weight of cement pipe collar was 315 kilograms. As per rule 62(2) of the Factories Rules, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules") as amended in the year 1995, an adult person could be made to lift a maximum weight of 55 kilograms, hence, four labourers could together lift 220 kilograms in a safe manner. Whereas in the present case, the occupant of the factory had made the four labourers lift the cement pipe collar weighing 315 kilograms on 21.5.1999 and thereby, committed breach of rule 62(2) of the Rules, which was an offence punishable under section 92 of the Act. The said complaint was lodged in the Court of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.4, Ahmedabad. The complaint came to be admitted by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.4, Ahmedabad, who took cognizance of the offence and issued summons to the accused.

(3.) MR . K. L. Pandya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the appellant submitted that in the present case, the respondent ­ accused had submitted Form No.21 prescribed under rule 103 for reporting the accident including dangerous occurrence resulting in death or bodily injury in respect of an accident that has taken place on 21.5.1999, which is clearly indicative of the fact that the accident had taken place at the premises of the accused and that the accused was responsible for due compliance of the provisions of the Act and the Rules. It was submitted that in the facts of the present case, the prosecution has duly established that the labourers were made to carry a load which was beyond the permissible limit, viz., beyond 55 kilograms each, and as such, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate was not justified in holding that the prosecution has not established the charges levelled against the accused beyond reasonable doubt.