STATE BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Vs. SIVAVADIVEL UDAYAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal filed by the State against the judgment of the Additional First Class Magistrate, Mayuram acquitting Sivavadivel Udayar, of the offences of contravening of S. 52, 45 (3) read with R. 63 (2) and S. 32(a) of the Factories Act, 1948 and the Madras Factories Rules, 1950 read with S. 92 of the Factories Act, 1948.

(2.) PRINCIPALLY , the case rests on the testimony of P. W. 1, Inspector of Factories at Tiruvarur. According to him, the accused is running a rice mill in R.S. No. 153/2, Nanaganallur. Admittedly, the factory in question comes within the scope and ambit of the Factories Act, 1948. On 2nd November, 1969 he visited the rice mill premises and found it working. 2nd November, 1969 is Sunday. The accused was not present. The son of the accused, one Ganapathy was present. 23 workers (men and women) were found working in the rice mill P. W. 1's complaint is that the accused did not intimate to him in writing that he was going to convert 2nd November, 1969 into a working day. His further grievance is that the first aid box was not kept under the possession of the trained person under the certificate issued by St. John's -Ambulance Association. He also complained against the accused in that he has failed to provide hand rails for the steps of the paddy -soaking tub. The learned trial Magistrate in paragraphs 8, 9 and 10 of his judgment, has dealt with the respective offences and acquitted the accused.

(3.) THE third argument of the learned Public Prosecutor is that the blue print of the rice Mill approved by the Chief Inspector does not clearly indicate that the steps leading to the paddy soaking tub are provided with hand rails.