S RANGANATHAN Vs. EMPLOYEESSTATE INSURANCE CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE revision petitions have been preferred against the judgment in C. A. Nos. 7,8 and 6 of 2002 respectively passed by the learned additional Sessions Judge, (FTC) Vellore , which had arisen out of the judgment in C. C. Nos. 295, 296 and 294 of 1994 respectively on the file of the Judicial Magistrate NO. I, Vellore . A3 and A4 in C. C. No. 295/1994 are the appellants in C. A. No. 7 of 2002, A2 and A3 in C. C. No. 296/1994 are the appellants in C. A. No. 8 of 2002 and A3 and A4 in C. C. No. 294 of 2004 are the appellants in C. A. No. 6 of 2002. The revision petitioners along with the co-accused have been charged under Section 85 (a)of the Employees'State Insurance Act,1948 for having violated the provisions contemplated under Section 40 (1) of the e. S. I. Act r/w Rule 31 of the Employees State Insurance Act under which they bound to collect the E. S. I. contribution from the employees and to remit the same with the E. S. I. Corporation Fund.

(2.) P. W. 1 Thiru Kumar, the Inspector of E. S. I. Corporation, vellore, while conducting an inspection of A1 spinning Mill on 14. 12. 1993, it was brought to light that for the period from April 1993 to September 1993 on behalf of the A1 spinning Mill, the E. S. I. Contribution collected from the employees of A1 Spinning Mill were not remitted with the E. S. I. Corporation fund, thereby contravening the provisions under Section 41 of E. S. I. Act r/w 31 of State Insurance Act punishable under Section 85 (a) of the E. S. I. Act. After taking cognizance, the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Vellore had taken the complaint on file as c. C. Nos. 295, 296 and 294 of 2004 respectively and issued summons to the accused on their appearance, copies under Section 207 Cr. P. C. were furnished to the accused when the charges were explained to the accused, they pleaded not guilty.

(3.) C. C. No. 296 of 2004: P. W. 2 would depose that A2 in c. C. No. 296 of 2004 Mr. R. Ranganathan was the Manager and A3 R. D. Rajendra Babu was Administrative Officer of A1 Spinning Mill and that he had conducted an inspection on 24. 12. 2993 in A1's Spinning Mill and it came to light that during april 199, May 1993 , July 1993, August 1993 and September 1993, the E. S. I. Contribution collected from the employees of A1 Spinning Mill were not remitted with the e. S. I. Corporation. Ex P2 is the report prepared by him. Exp3 is the order of sanction for prosecuting A1. Ex P5 is the show cause notice and under Ex P6, form C-19, A3 permitted to remit the arrears of E. S. I. Contribution. 5a. P. W. 3 would depose that Ex P8 register is relating to a1 Spinning Mill and that Exs P10 and P11 are the show cause notices received by the accused under Ex P12 acknowledgment. Ex P13 is the reply notice.