STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. SIMPLEX WOOLLEN MILLS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these five appeals are filed by the State for enhancement of sentence awarded to the respondents-accused by the Vth Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Thane under the provisions of the Provident Funds Act in five complaint cases filed at the instance of the Provident Fund Inspector by his different orders. I heard Mr. S. R. Borulkar for the State in all those five appeals also Mr. M. Janardan, learned Advocate for the respondents in all these appeals.

(2.) IN fact, there were six appeals filed by the State for enhancement including the present five appeals hereinbefore mentioned. The sixth appeal was Criminal Appeal No. 209 of 1985 in which I have passed order on merits on 6th Jan. 1997 after hearing Mr. Borulkar. In that appeal nobody appeared for the respondents and therefore after hearing Mr. Borulkar and after going through the record, the order on merits was passed allowing the appeal of the State.

(3.) ON the same day i. e. 6th Jan. 1997 Mr. Borulkar made his submissions regarding the five appeals. But judgment in those appeals was deferred because Mr. Borulkar was asked to give a chart. In the meantime i. e. before the judgment in the present five appeals was delivered, learned counsel for respondents Mr. M. Janardan appeared and prayed that he be heard in the matters. Accordingly, I heard him in the present five appeals and since the appeal No. 209 of 1985 was disposed of an merits there was no question of hearing the learned counsel for the respondents in that appeal. Therefore, this order will cover the five appeals only and not my order in Criminal Appeal No. 209 of 1985.