JIWAN DAS Vs. RABIN SEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule is directed against an order of the learned Sessions Judge, Burdwan, acquitting in appeal the opposite parties who had been convicted by the learned Magistrate, Asansol. of offence under Section 27 of the Industrial Disputes Act and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 250/- each.

(2.) In acquitting the opposite parties the learned Sessions Judge did not go into the findings of fact of the learned Magistrate but held that the Court acted without jurisdiction in trying the case as cognizance was taken in contravention of Section 34 of the Industrial Disputes Act. Section 34 is in these words : No Court shall take cognizance of any offence, punishable under this Act or of the abetment of any such offence, save on complaint made by or under the authority of the appropriate Government." It was contended before the learned Sessions Judge that the authority given under this section to be sufficient authority in law must satisfy the test laid down for 'sanction' for prosecution by the Privy Council in -- 'Gokulchand Dwarkadas v. The King', AIR 1948 PC 82 (A), and that test had not been satisfied.

(3.) It is contended before us by Mr. Dutt on behalf of the petitioner on the authority of a decision of this Court in the case of -- 'Ramdas v. K. M. Sen', that the principle laid down by the 'Privy Council in connection with 'sanction' for prosecution was not applicable to the 'authority' that may be given under Section 34 of this Act.