STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. PRECISION STEEL FASTNERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is preferred by the State against the order of acquittal dated 5.2.1998, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Pimpri, Pune, in Cri. Case No.11795 of 1989, whereby the learned Magistrate acquitted each of the respondents for the offence punishable under section 14(2A) of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.

(2.) THE respondent-company was prosecuted for an offence punishable under section 14(2A) of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The allegation is that the respondent-company had failed to pay the employer's share within time. The learned Magistrate held that the sanction required under the Act was not valid. It has been observed by the learned Magistrate that there was non-application of mind on the part of Sanctioning Authority, particularly because, admittedly Sanctioning Authority accorded the sanction to prosecute the accused for failure to pay the Employee's share instead of failure to pay the Employer's share. It is the case of the complainant that the respondent-company has failed to pay employer's share while in the order of sanction, it is written as Employees' share. Obviously, there is non-application of mind in according sanction. The contention of the Public Prosecutor in the memo of appeal that it is the case of the complainant that there is delay of 15 days in depositing the employees' share, is unsustainable in view of the clear observation of the learned Magistrate which is based on oral as well as documentary evidence. Therefore, I could not find any illegality in the order of acquittal. Before lodging the complaint, sanction under section 14(AC) of the Employees' Provident Fund and Family Pension Act, 1932 is required. In this case, as there is non-application of mind, this appeal deserves to be dismissed.