DILIP KUMAR ROY Vs. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) When the matter is called on for hearing, none appears on behalf of the petitioners. It is a matter of record that this revisional application has been pending before this Court since 2017. Despite the matter being listed on numerous occasions and ample opportunities being afforded to the petitioners to prosecute their cause, they have remained persistently absent. Further, there is no updated status report on the record from the Court of the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 5th Court, Calcutta, regarding the status of Special Case No. 3 of 2016. Given the long pendency of this litigation and the consistent failure of the petitioners to represent their case, this Court finds it neither feasible nor in the interest of justice to keep this matter pending any longer. Accordingly, I proceed to dispose of this matter on its merits based on the materials available on record.

(2.) The petitioners, who are partners of the firm "M/s. Art Union," have invoked the inherent powers of this Court under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking to quash the criminal proceedings in Special Case No. 3 of 2016. These proceedings were initiated by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner for alleged offences under Ss. 406, 409, and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, arising from an alleged default in depositing employees' provident fund contributions amounting to Rs.7,105.00 for the period of July 2015 to January 2016.

(3.) The primary contention of the petitioners is that they have subsequently deposited the full amount with the Provident Fund authorities, which was accepted without reservation. They contended that this subsequent payment effectively "compounded" the offence, and consequently, the criminal prosecution is unwarranted and constitutes an abuse of the process of law.