LAWS(GJH)-1993-4-6

STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. B S THAKKAR

Decided On April 19, 1993
STATE OF GUJARAT Appellant
V/S
B.S.THAKKAR,MANAGER,DIGVIJAY CEMENT COMPANY LIMITED Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the State of Gujarat for enhancement of the sentence is directed against impugned judgment and order, dated 5/11/1984, rendered in Criminal Case No. 4036 of 1984, by Mr. R. G. Pandya, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad [Rural] at Narol, wherein the respondents - B. S. Thakker, who came to be tried for the alleged offences punishable under Sees. 21(l)(iv)(c) and 92 of the Factories Act, 1948 [for short "the Act"], on pleading guilty was convicted for the same and sentenced to pay fine of Rs. 200.00, in default to undergo R I. for 20 days.

(2.) According to Mr. S. R. Bodat, the Factory Inspector, on 27-6-1984 when he visited 'Digvijay Cement Company Limited at Digvijay Nagar, Ahmedabad, he was informed that on 23-6-1984 at 11-30 a.m. one worker named Rampal Ramlal had met with fatal accident while on work and died on 26-6-1984 during the course of his treatment. Thereafter on making inquiry, the Factory Inspector recorded the statement of the workers present in the premises, viz., [1] Ramdulare Ramavadh; [2] Algu Shripat; [3] Kishor Ramdhan, Supervisor; and [4] Harischandra Babulal. On the basis of these facts, Factory Inspector ultimately filed a complaint dated Nil before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad [Rural] at Narol which from the endorsement on it appears to have been received by the said Court on 12- 9-1984. Thereafter, on respondent appearing before the Court on 5-11-1984, pleaded guilty and the learned Magistrate accepting the same, convicted and sentenced him passing a short order which reads as under :

(3.) Mr. K. P. Raval, the learned A.P.P. for the appellant-State while challenging the impugned order of unduly lenient order of sentence submitted that the same was ex-fade illegal being contrary to the minimum sentence prescribed in proviso to Sec. 92 of the said Act. Mr. Raval making good his submission, invited attention of this Court to the said proviso to Sec. 92 of the Act which reads as under :