SAHNEY KIRKWOOD PVT LTD Vs. S V BHAGWAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is filed for quashing Case No. 3456 of 1987 pending in the Court of J. M. F. C. First Class, Thane filed by Respondent No. 1 under Section 25 (N) and (Q) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 on the allegation that without the requisite prior permission of the appropriate Government the petitioners have retrenched the workmen.

(2.) FEW facts material for the disposal of this petition are that on September 15, 1984 the petitioners retrenched 50 workers with immediate effect. The same was brought to the notice of the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Thane by the Union. A show cause notice was issued to the management by letter dated February 7, 1986 and thereafter the present complaint came to the filed in the Magistrate's Court on September 23, 1987. A copy of the complaint is annexed as Exhibit 'a' to this petition which is dated September 23, 1987. On the said complaint process was issued by the Magistrate against the management and, therefore, the present petition is filed for quashing the process and the complaint filed in the Magistrate's Court. Applicants contend that the criminal proceeding was barred by limitation under Section 468 (2) (b) of the Cr. P. C. as the complaint was filed beyond a period of one year of limitation. As per the allegations in the complaint the offence committed by the applicants is that they had retrenched the workers without prior permission of the appropriate Government as laid down in Section 25-N of the Industrial Disputes Act which is punishable under Section 25-Q of the said Act. Under the latter provision such offence is punishable with imprisonment for a maximum period of one month or with fine which may extend to Rs. 1000/- or with both. Complaint in respect of an offence which is punishable upto maximum of one month imprisonment has to be filed within a period of one year either from the date of the offence or from the date the complainant comes to know about it under Section 469 of the Cr. P. C. The offence in the instant case was committed on September 17, 1984 on which date the complainant had come to know about the same through the Union of workers. Though the complainant came to know about the alleged commission of offence on September 17, 1984 a show cause notice was addressed to the Company for the first time on February 7, 1986 and thereafter the present complaint was filed on September 23, 1987 which is clearly barred by limitation under Section 469 of the Cr. P. C. That bar of limitation under the provision of the Cr. P. C. is applicable to the criminal prosecutions lodged under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act is not in issue as there are several judgments of the Courts on the point. Mr. Shirodkar cited the judgment of this Court in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Ajit Maneklal Choksi 1979-I-LLJ-423 (Bom ).

(3.) AS the prosecution lodged against the petitioner is barred by period of limitation as stated above, the complaint being Case No. 3456 of 1987 filed against the applicants in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Thane is liable to be quashed.